Gerald commented on my blog about other researchers adding more categories to Bartle's. I think this would definitely help with more accuracy on getting the right gamer type and it being a good description. More categories break it down even more.
Aleta commented on my blog about giving a gaming type quiz and more of a personality quiz to see the comparison. I think this would be great if only I had more hours to analyze the results. I feel like I would never have enough time to look at the results and figure out how I wanted to use the information. Ali talked about how she didn't agree with her results. I find this interesting becasue I took 3 gaming quizzes and got the same results on all 3. Kiang had a great description of what each meant outside of the gaming world as well as in the gaming world. I agreed with his description of achiever for outside the gaming world but I don't know about in it. I don't really play any games because I don't have time. I only have one one my phone. It is a puzzle game and usually this is my preference. I like to play alone becasue that is when I have the free time. I wonder if my game type would really fit in the gaming world? It is hard to tell at this point. I guess I need to play more games. I am in total agreement with Mariah. I did the same thing she did with taking multiple quizzes. She talked about the difficulty she had in answering some questions. I found the same to be true. There were some quiz questions I just picked an answer because I wasn't sure. I guess that is why there are so many questions so that a few questions you don't know probably don't really matter. I liked how at the end she summed it up with the fact that people learn differently. I think that is really what this week was all about. Differentiation would be the educational term for it and she is right that it is not new. It is just a different way of thinking about differentiation through gaming.
0 Comments
Essential Question: What is the implication of player type on game design? I took 3 quizzes this week. Here are the results: So I would guess these quizzes are fairly accurate since I got the same results on all quizzes (assuming "Ace" is the same as "Achiever"). However, the description may not be totally accurate, but it is pretty close. "According to Bartle, there are personality types (Bartle's Player Types), each of which must be considered by a game's designer. In other words, people play games for different reasons -- some to socialize, others to collect objects, and others who compete to win. When designing virtual worlds, all player types should be considered. Similarly, when teachers design lessons, multiple modalities should be addressed" (Farber 2015). There is some argument that Bartle's grouping has some weaknesses. For example, "Players each have different strategies for play and that as well as large-scale groupings of behavior around preferred playings, there are also many hidden, appropriative or resistive types of gameplay that are worth considering" (Dixon 2011). In other words, to group them like this assumes that there is no overlap between player types and that all of our actions relate to a particular player which in turn means that we fit certain game characteristics. It assumes that the way we act in games is how we act in the world. This may be mostly true, but I am not sure that it is completely true.
I like how Kiang talks about using a player type quiz with students, and that he uses it for grouping students throughout the year. Instead of grouping by test scores, which students may not take seriously, he allows them to answer personal questions, which will probably get a more accurate result. This is something that I would love to include in my classroom. Sources
Dixon, D. (2011). Player Types and Gamification. Retrieved October 13, 2016, from http://gamification-research.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/11-Dixon.pdf Farber, M. (2015, April 14). Interactive Fiction in the Classroom. Retrieved October 13, 2016, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/interactive-fiction-in-the-classroom-matthew-farber Kiang, D. (2014). Use the Four Gamer Types to Help Your Students Collaborate - from Douglas Kiang on Edudemic - EdTechTeacher. Retrieved October 14, 2016, from http://edtechteacher.org/use-the-four-gamer-types-to-help-your-students-collaborate-from-douglas-kiang-on-edudemic/ Gamer Type Quiz Links https://www.helloquizzy.com/tests/the-four-player-types-test http://givercraft.wikispaces.com/What+Type+of+Gamer+Are+You%3FresponseToken=a3c04e48f207be2109c 53866b32fffbd http://www.4you2learn.com/bartle/bartletest.php?test=ind This week I was reminded to ask myself why I am teaching something. Kids today have grown up with way more curiosity and we must be able to tell them why we are doing something. Both Anthony and Gerald commented about this on my blog. I know some things might seem useless if you aren't passionate about it, but how would we know what we like and don't like if we weren't exposed to it? This is a tough line as to when enough is enough for some subjects. Theresa commented about the screen time that kids today are exposed to. It just makes sense that they would process things differently. They are used to a lot of stimulation and multi-tasking. They seek challenges and sometimes school does not provide what they need.
Ali talked about how certain types of games are only intriguing to certain types of people. Even though it makes total sense it is not something I would've given thought to. It is definitely something to consider when I go to make a gamified plan for my classroom. I will have to really think about the components I use. Ali also had a great table that showed the different components of games that could be added. This will be very helpful to me because I am not a serious gamer. I enjoy playing any type of game when time permits but I rarely have time. I will really have to weave as many components as possible so all students are engaged. I really like the way Aleta laid out her blog post with the 3 claims. I believe all are true. The first claim is the claim that I latched on to right away in that our students now have not learned in the same way we have outside of school. Things are different. She points out dial up internet and when cell phones first came out. I remember all of this happening as a kid. If I look at how much things have changed over my lifetime I can see huge differences and I am only 27. I remember getting a computer and when cell phones first came out. Now we have smartphones with so much capability to connect us to others. These kids are just different and that is not a bad things. In the second claim Aleta mentions that students feel challenged and inspired by games. I think this is at the heart of gamification. They get in the "flow" and that is a place where they can really learn. The last claim she mentions I believe has always been true but we aren't always good at it. We must be flexible. There is not use in getting upset at things we cannot change and in the bush I have found this to be even more true. For example, planes come when they come and we live with that. Essential Question: What research can support or refute Matera's claims? Matera (2015) state state that "the educational structures built on the needs and desires of our great grandparents’ generation are fundamentally different from those of students today. And yet, many schools are still practicing two-hundred-year-old traditions." He goes on to present a chart with his claims as shown below. I agree with his claims. For one I don't remember students acting the way they do today. Students are far more independent and they want to do things the way they want to do them. They are not afraid to let teachers know this either. I would've been terrified to assert my point of view on one of my teachers, but my students don't seem to shy away. One of the biggest things I see is students need a passion for learning. Matulich (2008) says students "prefer self-paced learning, engagement from and with their peers, real experiences, time to reflect, and find relevance in 'things that matter' to them. In fact, they might even ask you to clarify 'what’s in it for me?'" Students aren't just accepting what teachers say as being important. They need someway to connect it to what they know. We need new ways to teach these students. "Today’s 21-year old has spent 10,000 hours playing video games, 20,000 hours watching TV, 10,000 hours talking on their cell phone, sent 250,000 emails and spent only 5,000 hours reading. As a result of this exposure to a multimedia environment, their brains have developed to respond to such stimulation and they therefore process information differently than their professors, parents, and just about anyone older than them. Yet when they reach college, they are often asked to read copious amounts of material from textbooks, which they find boring and are unable to successfully process" (Matulich 2008). Textbooks are not inspiring and students cannot be convinced that they are. Instead of trying to force students to use them we need to be innovative and think of ways to engage our learners today. Our students today are not passive learners. "'Old school' methods, especially the all too common lecture on content to passive learners, are proving less and less successful in bringing students to appropriate learning and development outcomes" (Taylor 2010). According to Fraser (2007) student learning has plateaued after initiatives and policies have been implemented. I think we just haven't come up with the right combination of tools to educate todays youth. I believe Matera (2015) has some great ideas and advice that make me more curious to research and try gamification in my classroom. Sources
Fraser, A. (2007). Developing Innovation in Education: A Disciplined Undertaking. Retrieved October 6, 2016, from http://rube.asq.org/edu/2009/03/innovation/developing-innovation-in-education-a-disciplined-undertaking.pdf Matera, M. (2015). Explore like a pirate: Engage, enrich, and elevate your learners with gamification and game-inspired course design [Kindle Edition]. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting. Matulich, E., Papp, R., & Haytko, D. L. (2008). Continuous improvement through teaching innovations: A requirement for today's learners. Marketing Education Review, 18(1), 1-7. Taylor, M. (2010). Teaching Generation NeXt: A Pedagogy for Today's Learners. Retrieved October 6, 2016, from http://www.taylorprograms.com/images/Teaching_Gen_NeXt.pdf Unfortunately my post this week was a day late. Cross country is officially over when I return tomorrow night. I'm happy for myself that it is over but I know my athletes already miss it and are talking about next season.
Anthony talked about Nearpod VR, and I was super glad he did. Our school district is piloting Nearpod, with hopes of maybe using it in the district in the future. I am a lucky teacher who gets to pilot it. I used to pay for it but then stopped, for no reason in particular. Thanks to Anthony I will now be able to try Nearpod VR when my pair of Cardboard arrives. I think Anthony is right that VR can be huge in establishing flow in the classroom. Students become immersed in a virtual world. I just need to test it out myself first so that I can figure out a way to best implement it in my classroom. Larissa posted a list of ideas to help with flow in the classroom. Even though she did not directly talk about VR in her post I can see how her ideas would help a teacher successfully implement VR in the classroom. She talks a lot about helping students leading their learning. This contributes to a student-centered learning environment which I have learned so much about in all of my classes. I firmly believe the more student-centered a class is the more engagement you can get from students. I am currently working towards providing as much teacher-centered learning as possible. She give a few suggestions to help achieve flow such as goal setting meetings with students and closing circles. Both these would help students to learn at their own pace and share their learning with others. Essential Question: How can immersive virtual reality enhance gamification? Essential Question: How can immersive virtual reality enhance gamification? According to Merry (2016) "immersive VR will help increase retention among students taking distance learning courses." He goes on to clarify that gamification with VR can help students to take part in things they can't experience rather than just looking at them in 2-D. One option to use VR to make lessons come to life is through the use of "Google’s virtual reality field trip kit called Expeditions." This program allows teachers to take students on VR field trips to places like Mars or Mount Everest. One issue with this technology according to Castaneda, Cechony, & Swanson (2016) is that "users of VR bring their life experiences, emotions and fears into the immersion with them. Previous research along with our experiences with elementary aged students have shown that they may have difficulty separating virtual reality from actual reality." However as the teacher it is our duty to keep this in mind to try to create an atmosphere where students can explore and learn. VR can challenge students and encourage them to do things they wouldn't normally do. "Being able to be fully immersed and interact with the virtual environments takes courage for youth because, as one teacher puts it, 'They are willing to do things that would look goofy even without the goggles on because they are so excited and immersed in the experience.' This kind of comfort and safety to explore that environment comes from a strong set of teacher and student expectations for shared behaviors and norms" (Castaneda, Cechony, & Swanson 2016). Another comment that was more of a concern. is that a student didn't want teachers to ruin this technology of VR like other previous technologies. He said "I would like teachers to understand that VR doesn’t have to be the same as current schooling...students should explore instead of mindlessly following paths where they don’t even need to think to understand” (Castaneda, Cechony, & Swanson 2016). I think this is such a great point. Student need to explore. They need to creat their own path. One example is when VR was used to teach special relativity. It was described as "a software package is used to introduce concepts of special relativity to students in a game-like environment where users experience the effects of travelling at near light speeds" (McGrath, Wegner, & Savage 2009). This is a tough concept to be grasped for any student. In the end "Students found the simulation to be a positive learning experience and described the subject area as being less abstract after its use. Also, students were more capable of correctly answering concept questions relating to special relativity, and a small but measurable improvement was observed in the final exam" (McGrath, Wegner, & Savage 2009). Another key feature McGrath, Wegner, & Savage (2009) mention is that the special relativity VR experience challenged misconceptions that the lab did no target. Students were able to experience something that they could not experience in their everyday life. In the end all studies that I read found VR to be a positive experience. The study by Castaneda, Cechony, & Swanson (2016) found that "contrary to some concerns that VR would be isolating, the students and teachers in our study found it to be an excellent mechanism for shared experience, dialogue and bonding." They also found that VR "sparked further interest in pursuing tech courses for some of the young women who were already enrolled. Students and teachers in VR classes were eager to share the technology with the wider school community, and many students even became local experts in running and supporting VR." McGrath, Wegner, & Savage (2009) found VR to increase understanding and confidence in spatial relativity. Merry (2016) listed ideas for incorporating VR that could help student retention. He mentions Time Machine to help students experience dinosaurs. I cannot wait to get my own Cardboard to experience this. Sources
Castaneda, L., Cechony, A., & Swanson, T. (2016). Implications of Virtual Reality in Applied Educational Settings. Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://foundry10.org/dev/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Implications-of-Virtual-Reality-in-Applied-Educational-Settings.pdf McGrath, D., Wegner, M., & Savage, C. (2009, November 2). Student experiences of virtual reality - a case study in learning special relativity. Retrieved September 30, 2016, from https://arxiv.org/pdf/0911.0226.pdf Merry, P. (2016, September 29). Immersive Virtual Reality: Online Education for the Next Generation. Retrieved October 01, 2016, from http://www.centerdigitaled.com/blog/immersive-virtual-reality-online-education-for-the-next-generation.html What classroom strategies can contribute to or detract from "flow" ?"Game designers know that players walk away from games that are either too easy or hard. Finding that 'sweet spot; for the gamer is what psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi calls flow found in Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology. Flow is a state of heightened focus and immersion one experiences while participating in activities such as art, play, and work" (Matera 2015). So this an an experience where the gamer forgets about everything else and is solely focused on the game they are playing. Matera goes on to talk a lot about creativity. "He defines flow as the creative moment when a person is completely involved in an activity for its own sake. He says, 'When we are involved in [creativity], we feel that we are living more fully than during the rest of life'" (Matera 2015). This means that creativity is a large part of experiencing flow. Creativity alone is not enough though. Berkling & Thomas (2013) discuss how humans are motivated to work on difficult tasks when there is a purpose, autonomy and some sort of mastery involved. Sillaots (2014) concludes something similar in that goals must be clear and the activities must be organized in an engaging way for participants to become immersed. To achieve flow Sillaots (2014) suggests the following:
Another argument to include games comes from Willis (2011) who is a neurobiologist. She states that "games insert players at their achievable challenge level and reward player effort and practice with acknowledgement of incremental goal progress, not just final product. The fuel for this process is the pleasure experience related to the release of dopamine." When dopamine is released we experience pleasure. If you get feedback that tells you that you are correct you want to continue to experience this. "In a sequential, multilevel video game, feedback of progress is often ongoing, such as accumulating points, visual tokens, or celebratory sound effects, but the real jolt of dopamine reward is in response to the player achieving the challenge, solution, sequence, etc. needed to progress to the next and more challenging level of the game" (Willis 2011). Games can provide targeted instruction at the students' level helping them to continue to try a challenging task. One thing you need to give careful consideration to before changing your classroom to include gamification is how fast and how many changes you plan to introduce. Berkling & Thomas (2013) state that "the most important changes will be to use gamification elements without naming them explicitly and to introduce change from traditional style classroom to learning environment very slowly." It is not good to change everything at once. I am in total agreement with this because everything that I have tried to do all at once has at least partially flopped, if not fully flopped. Sources
Berkling, K., & Thomas, C. (2013). Gamification of a Software Engineering course and a detailed analysis of the factors that lead to it's failure. In 2013 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL). Retrieved September 25, 2016, from https://www.researchgate.net/ Matera, M. (2015). Explore like a pirate: Engage, enrich, and elevate your learners with gamification and game-inspired course design [Kindle Edition]. San Diego, CA: Dave Burgess Consulting. Sillaots, M. (2014, October). Achieving Flow through Gamification: A study on Re-designing Research Methods Courses. 8th European Conference on Games Based Learning, 2. Retrieved September 25, 2016, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ Willis, J. (2011, April 14). A Neurologist Makes the Case for the Video Game Model as a Learning Tool. Retrieved September 26, 2016, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/neurologist-makes-case-video-game-model-learning-tool Essential Question: What is the difference between Gaming and Gamification and why does it matter?First lets start with some definitions. A game is "a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck" (Davis 2014). Gamification is "'the use of game design elements in non-game contexts'" (Groh 2012). To understand gamification you first need to understand the different aspects or components of games. Games can be utilized in many contexts. For the purpose of this class I will focus on education. Davis (2012) states that powerful games for the classroom usually include the following:
Sources
Davis, V. (2014, October 13). A Guide to Game-Based Learning. Retrieved September 18, 2016, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/guide-to-game-based-learning-vicki-davis Groh, F. (2012, February 14). Gamification: State of the Art Definition and Utilization. Retrieved September 18, 2016, from https://oparu.uniulm.de/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/1800/vts_7866_11380.pdf?sequence=1#page=39 Nicholson, S. (2012, June). A User-Centered Theoretical Framework for Meaningful Gamification. Retrieved September 18, 2016, from http://www.quilageo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Framework-for-Meaningful-Gamifications.pdf Essential Question: What common characteristics do engaging games have?First we must talk about what a game is. Smith-Robbins (2011) says that all games have "three basic characteristics":
How are games made to be so engaging that we strive for an "epic win"? According to an Edutopia article titled Using Gaming Principles to Engage Students Kiang (2014) talked with game designer to create a list of the top 5 secrets they use to make gaming engaging to the user.
Sources
Chen, J. (2007). Flow in games (and everything else). Communications of the ACM, 50(4). Engaging. (2016). Retrieved September 9, 2016, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/engaging Ermi, L. (2005). Fundamental components of the gameplay experience: Analysing immersion. Authors & Digital Games Research Association DiGRA. Kiang, D. (2014, October 14). Using Gaming Principles to Engage Students. Retrieved September 12, 2016, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/using-gaming-principles-engage-students-douglas-kiang McGonigal, J. (2010). Gaming can make a better world. Retrieved September 09, 2016, from http://www.ted.com/talks/jane_mcgonigal_gaming_can_make_a_better_world?language=en Smith-Robbins, S. (2011, February 7). "This Game Sucks": How to Improve the Gamification of Education. Retrieved September 12, 2016, from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2011/2/this-game-sucks-how-to-improve-the-gamification-of-education |
Gamification & Open EducationCategories |