4 Pillars of Digital Game Based Learning A Structured Rating System for Games for Learning “If we teach today's students as we did yesterday's, we are robbing them of tomorrow.” — John Dewey 6: Thur. May 15 1:30-2:20 >/dev/null 2>&1 Who Am I? 20/10/2014 Katrinof Becker, 4 Pillars Digital Game Based Learning PhD © K.Becker 2 What am I playing Now? 20/10/2014 Gamification Workshop © K.Becker 3 The Challenge 1. Games are complex. What should we assess? Gameplay? All levels or just one? All modes of play or just one? In-Game Assessment? Curricular Ties? The Challenge 1. Games are complex. 2. Assessments designed for commercial games miss the mark. Doesn't look at the right things. Concerned with fun & engagement not learning. The Challenge 1. Games are complex. 2. Assessments designed for commercial games miss the mark. 3. Assessments designed for ‘traditional’ instruction also miss the mark. Don't really take the medium as integral. The Challenge 1. Games are complex. 2. Assessments designed for commercial games miss the mark. 3. Assessments designed for ‘traditional’ instruction also miss the mark. 4. Summative assessment not always an option. May not have data, or opportunity The Challenge 1. Games are complex. 2. Assessments designed for commercial games miss the mark. 3. Assessments designed for ‘traditional’ instruction also miss the mark. 4. Summative assessment not always an option. 5. Critical reviews are hard to do (and even harder to find). The Challenge Digital Games cannot be assessed in the same way as traditional games, or for that matter, any other modern media form. 1. What do we need from digital games for learning? 2. What criteria are important when assess games? What Makes Digital Different? Digital vs Non-Digital Games Digital Digital Games (and Simulations) (ALL) Model of Original System Rule Enforcement Rule Structures Roles Environment Painstakingly and precisely defined. Analog Board & Card Games Analog Simulation Games Analog Role- Live Action Role-Play Playing Games (including cosplay) Many details taken for granted and never made explicit. Hard-coded. Pre-determined. Accurate placement into context. Uses 'honor system'. On the fly. Negotiable. Imagined, personally Imagined, personally Determined by game rules. mediated. mediated. Combined static physical Dynamic - same for all Imagined: Static - unchanging. artifacts (boards & pieces) AND players. personalized. imagined. Environment Resolution Dynamic. Static physical. Game Objects Can be autonomous. Either inert or mechanical Imagined (can include props). Consistent only if the rules are followed. Each instantiation can be different. Game Interaction Consistent across all (what people can instantiations of the do with / to the game. game) Participants Relatively static. Relatively static. There need only be one All participants are human. human participant. Individually mediated. What Do We Need? • Structured Approach – for comparability • Concise – not too long • Complete – as a game AND as a learning object What Criteria Are Important? • How is it as a game? • Does it have teacher support? • Is it well-designed as an educational object? • Are the various elements appropriately balanced? What Makes A Game Good? What Makes a Good Game for Learning? A Solution Overview • Model for evaluating and assessing games • Subjective tool • Learning NEED NOT = education • Currently developed for single-player games – Relative Proportions Four Pillars Ratings • Common Likert scale. • Includes missing & N/A • Content & Originality • Game Mechanics • Game Progression • Artistic Design • Setting & Characters • Audio Gameplay & Esthetics Game Overview 30% Educational Overview 70% • 3 of 4 Pillars – Educational Content – Magic Bullet Rating • 20% Magic Bullet Rating • 20% Teacher Support – Teacher Support Educational Content • 30% • Instructional Strategies • Instructional Design • Integration • Objectives • Accuracy • Assessment Educational Content Educational Content • Guides • Plug N' Play • Resources • Community Teacher Support Teacher Support • Overall Balance • Can Learn vs Must Learn • Operational vs Educational Learning • Educational vs Discretionary Learning Magic Bullet Rating Magic Bullet Rating Magic Bullet Magic Bullet Things I CAN Learn •Anything we CAN learn through the gameplay. •Deliberately designed by those who created the game. •May impact success in the game •Includes things designers *hope* people will take up. •Includes game-specific objectives as well as general ones. 20/10/2014 4 Pillars of Digital Game Based Learning © K.Becker 24 Magic Bullet Magic Bullet Things I MUST Learn •Things we MUST learn to achieve our goals. •Deliberately designed by those who created the game. •Definitely impacts success in the game. •Needed in order to win or get to the end. •Should be a subset of the first category. •Required to achieve a specific game goal or in order to win. 20/10/2014 4 Pillars of Digital Game Based Learning © K.Becker 25 Magic Bullet Magic Bullet External Learning • Things we learn outside the bounds of normal gameplay. • Deliberately designed by those who created the game. • Not technically considered part of the normal gameplay. • May impact success in the game • Includes social learning and outside communities. • Also includes Cheats. • Typically designed into the game for testing purposes. • Often left in the game once it ships • Deliberate design elements on the part of the designers. 20/10/2014 4 Pillars of Digital Game Based Learning © K.Becker 26 Magic Bullet Magic Bullet Collateral Learning •Things we learn as a result of the game, but not as part of normal gameplay. •Not designed into the game (at least, not on purpose). •No impact on success in the game. •Other things we can learn. •These are not necessarily designed into the game, although sometimes designers may hope that players choose to take these up. 20/10/2014 4 Pillars of Digital Game Based Learning © K.Becker 27 20/10/2014 4 Pillars of Digital Game Based Learning © K.Becker 28 Abstract 4 Pillars of DGBL: A Structured Rating System for Games for Learning Videogames are interactive by nature - people proceed in games by doing things, and this experiential quality lies at the very core of game design. Without interaction, it isn’t a game. Videogames are popular precisely because of the experience - games designed for learning can do no less. However, to be feasible for use in formal educational settings, they must do more, and while we are making progress studying games in classrooms, there remain few structured approaches to analysing games that do not include classroom testing. This presentation will outline the author’s Four Pillars of Game-Based Learning and show using examples how they can be used to perform a structured analysis of both COTS and serious games to assess whether or not a game has potential for use in the classroom. These four pillars are: 1. Gameplay - How is it as a game? Is it fun? Is it Interesting? How does it measure up esthetically? 2. Educational Content - Are there one or more recognizable educational objectives, discernible either from the game itself or from the accompanying support materials. 3. Teacher Support - Is there adequate teacher support to make viable for use in a formal setting? 4. Balance - This section examines the game through the lens of the Magic Bullet model to see how well the various learning elements are balanced. Together these four pillars highlight the key issues associated with the use of games in the classroom. 20/10/2014 4 Pillars of Digital Game Based Learning © K.Becker 29