Microsoft Innovative Teachers Conference--Q & A Session

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    Thank Chris Webb, NDATL leadership Jody French, EduTech (good work they do--interns--two graduates there Tabitha Lang and Lynne Anderson) You guys are all leaders in education and the technology that supports and enhances--on the cutting edge--honored to be here

    2 Favorites

    Microsoft Innovative Teachers Conference--Q & A Session - Presentation Transcript

    1. Games as Innovative Teaching Designing COTS GBL Richard Van Eck, Associate Professor Instructional Design & Technology University of North Dakota [email_address] idt.und.edu Copyright Richard Van Eck, 2008. This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the author. Q & A Session, Microsoft Innovative Teachers’ Conference May 29, 2008
    2. Three Approaches to GBL
      • Games are created by students
        • Students take on role of game designers
        • In building, learn content, problem-solving, programming
        • Time intensive and limited domains
      • Educational games could be built from scratch
        • We design games to seamlessly integrate learning and game play
        • Resource intensive
        • Lead to edutainment/Shavian Reversals (Papert, 1998)
      • Commercial games are integrated into the curriculum
        • Support, deliver, and/or assess learning in the classroom
        • Most cost effective
        • Leave game play to designers, learning to teachers
        • Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) GBL
    3. Having Students Create Games
      • Tools exist for game development
        • Game Maker ( http://www.gamemaker.nl/index.html )
        • Power Game Factory ( http://www.sawbladesoftware.com /)
        • Neverwinter Nights ( http://nwn.bioware.com/builders/ )
        • Stagecast Creator ( http://www.stagecast.com /)
        • Kahootz ( http://www.kahootz.com/kz/ )
        • Multimedia Fusion, Games Factory, Klik & Play ( http://www.clickteam.com )
      • Campus “Gaming” School
        • 5th- and 6th-grade students played and designed games
        • Manitoba Girl Game Project
        • Can yield interesting findings
          • Girls came to believe technology was not difficult/related to science
      • Challenges
        • Full range of game types not possible; labor- and time-intensive
    4. Building Educational Games
      • Many examples
        • Education Arcade: Environmental Detectives & Revolution
        • Carnegie Mellon HazMat : Hot Zone
        • William Massy/Enlight Software: Virtual U
        • Chris Dede: River City
        • Steck-Vaughn & Top Drawer: Adventures in Problem Solving
        • Van Eck: Math Builders & AP Adventure
      • Challenges
        • Labor intensive
        • Need to get ID and game developers on same page
        • Shavian Reversals
    5. COTS GBL
      • Practical considerations
        • Can’t cover them all
      • Similarities to all technology integration
        • See Morrison & Lowther; Grabe & Grabe
      • Some principles as heuristic for thinking about COTS GBL
        • Aligning with the curriculum and the content
        • What to do about missing/inaccurate content
        • How to create extension activities
    6. Challenges
      • Commercial games are not designed to teach
        • Topics will be limited
          • But there are ways around this
        • Content will be inaccurate or incomplete
          • But this is actually a good thing
      • Commercial games are expensive to purchase
        • But not as expensive as building from scratch
        • And not as expensive as implementing ineffective games
    7. Integrating COTS Games in Learning
      • Not all games alike
        • Card games
          • Matching, numbers, patterns
        • Jeopardy-style games
          • Verbal information, facts, concrete concepts
        • Arcade style (“twitch” games)
          • Speed, visual processing, automaticity
        • Adventure
          • Hypothesis testing, problem solving
    8. Matching Taxonomies
      • Sometimes topic matches content of course
      For Example: Choosing a Suitable Game Game Game Content Course Content Age of Empires, Civilization History History Sim City Geography, Civil Engineering Geography, Civil Engineering Law & Order, C.S.I. Criminal Justice, Forensic Sciences Criminal Justice, Forensic Sciences
    9. For Example: Choosing a Suitable Game
      • Other times, gameplay matches content of course
      Game Gameplay Course Content Contraption, Roller Coaster Tycoon Build Machines To Specification & Tolerances Physics, Mathematics, Engineering Cruise Ship Tycoon Manage Budgets, Purchase Supplies, Ensure Financial Success Business, Economics, Resort Management
    10. How Is Game Aligned With Curriculum?
      • Top-down or bottom-up
        • Game as frame for new learning (top-down)
        • Game as chance to synthesize and apply prior knowledge (bottom-up)
        • Hybrid of both
    11. How Is Game Aligned with Content?
      • What IS covered?
        • Breadth vs. depth (Civilization vs. Call of Duty)
      • What is NOT covered?
        • Missing topics (breadth); missing content within topic (depth); Pre-requisite knowledge required
      • What is wrong? (teachable moments)
        • Inaccurate information (poetic license)
        • Misleading information
        • Alternate viewpoints/interpretations (Conquest of the Americas)
        • Inappropriate/incorrect strategies
    12. Design & Evaluation
      • Missing & inaccurate content
        • Which content will you have to add?
        • Who will provide this? (you, students, both)
          • Maximize learner responsibility
      • How will you manage gameplay?
        • Saved games, play in/out of class
      • What activities can be created to address weaknesses?
        • Math & numbers: Budgets, spreadsheets, reports/charts, databases
        • Writing: Diary, reports, letters, legal briefs, faxes, multiple viewpoints
        • Science: Duplicate/conduct experiments (endogenously!); conduct feasibility studies
        • Research: Assess game veracity, provide missing data
    13. Stay in the Game
      • Learning is integral to story in commercial games
      • Leads to flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990: The psychology of optimum experience)
        • Optimal learning state
      • Intrinsic motivation (Malone & Lepper, 1987)
        • Endogenous vs. exogenous fantasy (in relation to content)
        • Endogenous fantasy will promote flow
        • When not IN game, keep activities & roles endogenous TO game
    14. Making the Call
      • Is it worth the time?
        • Good games can easily take 30 to 50 hours to fully play
        • Is the amount of potential learning justified by the amount of work and time to implement the game?
        • Are you willing to admit it is not?
    15. Technology Integration
      • Movement toward integration
        • Authentic problem-solving
        • Collaboration, team-based
        • All those things not doing now...
      • Match technology to learning
        • Minimize weaknesses, maximize strengths
      • Must integrate immersive technologies like games
        • Good news: teaching problem-solving is ALSO teaching content
    16. NTeQ
      • iNtegrating Technology for inQuiry
        • Teacher is technologically competent; assumes role of designer, manager, and facilitator
        • Student is actively engaged; assumes role of researcher; becomes technologically competent
        • Computer is used as a tool to solve realistic problems using real data
        • Lesson is student-centered, problem-based, and authentic; technology is integral component
        • Environment incorporates multiple resources
    17. Technology as a tool
      • Every technology has its strengths and weaknesses
      • Must use right tool for right job
        • Blith-whopping
        • Spreadsheets are good for:
        • Databases are good for:
        • PowerPoint is good for:
    18. Why NTeQ & Games
      • Share common theoretical framework
        • Both focus on PBL
        • Both emphasize Situated Learning & Cognition
        • Both support question asking (inquiry) & scaffolding (support)
      • Games are relevant
      • Games reflect 21st century skill sets
    19. Examples
      • I Spy
      • Zoo Tycoon
      • Sim City
    20. NTeQ Students
      • Spend most of their time:
        • Interacting with others
        • Formulating questions
        • Gathering and organizing data
        • Testing hypotheses
        • Organizing and presenting conclusions
    21. Media Use in the Schools
      • “AV in the schools will revolutionize learning!”
        • “Kids are different today”
        • “Media is more motivating”
        • “Media reaches more learners”
      • Hundreds of “horse race” studies
        • Meta-analyses show “no significant difference” (NSD)
      • Why?
        • Never accounted for the strengths and weaknesses
        • Never aligned media, learning outcomes, & pedagogy
        • Mistook use for integration
    22. Computing Technology in the Schools
      • “Computers in schools will revolutionize learning!”
        • “Kids are different today”
        • “Computers are more motivating”
      • Educators and IDers: “Where’s the Beef?”
        • Inconsistency of implementation, ID
      • Hundreds of studies, some good
        • SOME evidence to support optimism, but. . .
        • Overall, no significant difference
      • Same Story

    + rvaneckrvaneck, 2 years ago

    custom

    1312 views, 2 favs, 4 embeds more stats

    This is my follow-up Q&A presentation for the Micro more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 1312
      • 1191 on SlideShare
      • 121 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 2
    • Downloads 0
    Most viewed embeds
    • 112 views on http://adifference.blogspot.com
    • 6 views on http://madlat2009.wikispaces.com
    • 2 views on http://gamingineducation.wikispaces.com
    • 1 views on http://www.adifference.blogspot.com

    more

    All embeds
    • 112 views on http://adifference.blogspot.com
    • 6 views on http://madlat2009.wikispaces.com
    • 2 views on http://gamingineducation.wikispaces.com
    • 1 views on http://www.adifference.blogspot.com

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories