Serious Games Challenges and Potentials


Published on

Presentation from 8th of December – 4 serious talks on Serious Games in Health Care

Odense DK

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Serious Games Challenges and Potentials

  1. 1. Niels Henrik Helms
  2. 2. Whatarewetalkingabout ?A serious game is a game in which education (in its various forms) is the primary goal, rather than entertainment. (Michael & Chen, 2006)Games may be played seriously or casually. We are concerned with serious games in the sense that these games have an explicit and carefully thought-out educational purpose and are not intended to be played primarily for amusement. This does not mean that serious games are not, or should not be entertaining. (Abt, 1970/71)
  3. 3. A Paradox?• No, all games areserious – othervisetheyaredull and not games!• But we do have a challenge!!
  4. 4. The Challenge!Serious Games brings two disciplines and rationalities into interaction:• Didactic Design – Where the outcome is Learning• Game Design – Where the outcome is Winning• Didactic Design is basically about giving form to learning – where gaming could be one of the means to achieve learning• Whereas Game design is about giving form to a game. People do learn through gaming– but it is definitely not the purpose/goal.
  5. 5. Traditional, Vocationalor GBL Traditional Hands-on Learning GBL TrainingPrice x (x)Standardised– easy x xto evaluateEngaging x xAdaptive x xInstant Feedback x xTransfer x (x)Learner as subject (x) xAuthentic x (x)
  6. 6. MULTI DISCIPLINARITY• To solve this challenge. On the one hand to develop an engaging motivating game design and on he other hand to ensure that the intended learning happens – NOT CROSS – BUT MULTI DISCIPLINARITY IS A MUST• If it is a bad game design no one will use the game – or the players will try to transform the non-game into a game• If it is a bad didactic design people will learn – but probably something else• .
  7. 7. So Unite• Game Designers – The wholecrowd• Didactic Designers – SME’s, Instructional Designers and Interaction Designers• Worktogetherdevelop a language and concepts• Meetings
  8. 8. Observing ConstructingRe-Constructing Co-Constructing
  9. 9. Observing ConstructingRe-Constructing Co-Constructing
  10. 10.
  11. 11. Games and Soldiers• It is good for them:• 3-4 hours of video gaming daily proved across a large sample survey of the Army stationed in Afghanistan to provide the best protection against PTSD, depression, family violence and suicidal ideation. The only activity that provided more mental resilience was 5-6 hours of physical training daily; 3-4 hours of video gaming beat reading, music, general Internet/social networking, and physical training up to 5 hours/day.• However, more than 4 hours of gaming showed dangerous declines in mental resilience 7-8 hours a day or more, as bad as no gaming-- and no gaming was very bad.
  12. 12. But War is not Good for Them• PTSD (PostTraumatic Stress Disorder)• Growing Problem• Treatment – various forms such as exposure therapy (ET)
  13. 13. MultiDisciplinarity• Apex - Game Developers• Serious Games Interactive (SGI)• Falck A/S• Shelterland• PhotobiaApS• Siemens Healthcare• The Central Association of Permanent Defense Personnel (CS)
  14. 14. • Region HovedstadensPsykiatri,• The Danish Research Unit of Psychological Trauma• DI - Confederation of Danish Industry• The IT University• Knowledge Lab
  15. 15. OngoingProcess• What is PTSD• What makes it happen• How do we cope with it• Integration in Game & Didactic Design• To develop new practises
  16. 16. Game Design• Goals• Rules• Feedback• Authentic• A Strong”Gameplay” (anotherstrangeword)
  17. 17. Comming Up..• AffectiveGaming - &Learning• AugmentedGaming - &Learning Nacke, L.E., Kalyn, M., Lough, C., Mandryk, R.L. (2011). Biofeedback Game Design: UsingDirect and IndirectPhysiologicalControl to Enhance Game Interaction. In Proceedings of CHI 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada
  18. 18. Situated learning – MultiModal I hear, I know Deeper Auditory Learning Visual Kinaesthetic I see, I remember I do, I understand
  19. 19.
  20. 20. Assessment and GBL
  21. 21. Assessingvs GBL 1990ies Performance Assessment in vivo fx Portfolio Does 70ies: 1970ies-80ies Performance assessmentShows How in vitro (OSCE)Knows how 1960ies: Written complex simulations Knows
  22. 22. Assessingvs GBL “Generic Competences Does - How we cope if things turn out differently” Shows HowKnows How Knows
  23. 23. Weare not just looking!!
  24. 24. ReferencesAbt, C.C. (1970/71). Serious Games. N.Y.,VikingPressEgenfeldt-Nielsen, S. (2007). Third Generation Educational Use of Computer Games. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. v16,3.Fullerton, T., Swain, C., Hoffman, S.(2008). Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games. Amsterdam: Elsevier Morgan Kaufmann, 2008.Gale,K, et al (2002): TriadicAssessment, Assessment&Evaluation in HigherEducation, 27:6, 557-567Klopfer, E., K. Squire, and H. Jenkin. n.d. Environmentaldetectives:The development of an augmented reality platform for environmentalsimulations. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Publications.Logan, K.,R.(2001).The SixthLanguage: Learning a Living in the Internet Age”McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World . PenguinPress.Michael, D., &Chen, S. (2006). Serious games: Games thateducate, train and inform. Thomson: Boston, MAMiller GE.(1990) The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Academic Medicine (Supplement); 65: S63-S7.Nacke, L.E., Kalyn, M., Lough, C., Mandryk, R.L. (2011). Biofeedback Game Design: UsingDirect and IndirectPhysiologicalControl to Enhance Game Interaction. In Proceedings of CHI 2011, Vancouver, BC, CanadaVan der Vleuten, C. P. M., & D. Swanson, D. (1990). Assessment of Clinical Skills With Standardized Patients: State of the Art. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 2(2), 58 - 76.Van derVleuten, C. P. M., &Newble, D. I. (1995). How can we test clinical reasoning? The Lancet, 345, 1032-1034.Van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Norman, G. R., & De Graaff, E. (1991). Pitfalls in the pursuit of objectivity: Issues of reliability. Medical Education, 25, 110-118.Van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Schuwirth, L. W. T. (2005). Assessment of professional competence: from methods to programmes. Medical Education, 39, 309-317.Slideshows: Lessons learned in Assesment.ppt
  25. 25. illustrations• Slide # 1. By presenter• Slide # 8 By presenter• Slide # 9 By presenter + osef-the-robot/ (manipulated)• Slide # learning-spaces-for-a-digital-world• Slide # 19• Slide # 21 & 22 MHPE Lessons learned in Assesment.ppt