Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Learning Game Design Team Communication


Published on

Presentation of research to better understand how different disciplines on a learning game design team think about learning game design. Includes actions design teams can take to mitigate misunderstandings. Also includes implications for a hybrid learning game design model.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Learning Game Design Team Communication

  1. 1. A Communication Framework: A Babel Fish for Instructional Game Designers [email_address] [email_address] [email_address] Raytheon BBN Technologies IDSI IDSI Talib Hussain, PhD Ellen Menaker, PhD Susan Coleman, PhD
  2. 2. Topics <ul><li>Introduction </li></ul><ul><li>The Babel Fish </li></ul><ul><li>Research purpose </li></ul><ul><li>Participants </li></ul><ul><li>Procedure </li></ul><ul><li>What we found and what it means </li></ul>
  3. 3. Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy – Douglas Adams
  4. 4. I need a serious game! I need a game that has elements of fun and helps the player attain instructional goals!
  5. 5. Research Purpose <ul><li>Examine how different disciplines conceptualize serious game elements </li></ul><ul><li>Identify specific actions that can be taken to mitigate misunderstandings </li></ul><ul><li>Inform a hybrid serious game design model </li></ul>
  6. 6. Procedure <ul><li>Pilot Survey </li></ul><ul><li>Final Learning Games Design Survey (88 items) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Demographics (7) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rate importance of game elements (22) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rate the agreement or disagreement with statements (33) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rate frequency of expected change for game elements (22) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Select best definition of terms (4) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Analyzed survey data by discipline and game-type experience </li></ul><ul><li>Reported findings in 5 areas </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Goals, authenticity, design, feedback, fun </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Participants <ul><li>Distributed survey to the Learning Game Design COI (n=89) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>49% response rate </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Disciplines: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Gaming (37%) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Instructional (67%) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gaming Experience: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Entertainment games (27%) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Simulations (36%) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Instructional games (38%) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Key Finding Agreement on many items, but significant differences were detected in the levels of agreement <ul><li>May impact decisions </li></ul><ul><li>May impact priorities </li></ul><ul><li>May be the source of many communication issues </li></ul>
  9. 9. Findings - Goals <ul><li>Agreement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Communicating learning goals is important </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Achieved learning goals are the most important aspect of game evaluation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Differences </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Learning objectives are important </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>LOs are primary driver of an instructional game </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>A good instructional game must produce measurable learning outcomes </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Game goals and learning objectives must align </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>LOs can be changed to accommodate scenario design </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Usability is the most important aspect of instructional game evaluation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Articulate alignment of LOs with game goals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Solicit multidisciplinary input into prototype evaluation criteria </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Agree on criteria for setting LO priorities </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Findings - Authenticity <ul><li>Agreement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fantasy is OK </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tasks should align with required cognitive thinking </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Differences </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fantasy should provide a useful metaphor </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Important to mirror real-world tasks </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fantasy makes games more compelling </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Discuss impact of design choices on associated cognitive skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Articulate the connection between cognitive requirements and fantasy </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Findings - Design <ul><li>Agreement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Incorporate well-developed characters </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Use dynamic graphics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adapt game to player performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Allow for learner control </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Accommodate novice and expert </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Difference </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Expect key design elements to change frequently </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify all elements that are impacted by design changes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Discuss instructional trade-offs of changes to gaming mechanics (and vice versa) </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Findings - Feedback <ul><li>Agreement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>It is important to assess performance and give feedback </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>It is OK to stop game to give feedback (even explicit feedback) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Penalties are OK in an instructional game </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Natural feedback alone may not be sufficient </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Differences </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Frequent feedback strategy changes during design are not expected </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Feedback is used for its instructional value </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Feedback is used for motivation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Discuss how to design feedback to be instructionally valuable and motivational </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consider criteria for interrupting the game for feedback </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Findings - Fun <ul><li>Agreement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Fun is important </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fun is not necessary for instructional effectiveness </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Learners should enjoy the instructional game </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>An engaging game is a fun game </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Differences </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Learning is the priority </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fun is the priority </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Someone having fun is more likely to learn </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Better for users to think of themselves as players rather than learners </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Implication </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reconcile recommended design changes with fun </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. Findings - Definitions <ul><li>High-fidelity instructional game </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Authentic thinking (75%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Authentic environment (19%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Authentic tasks (6%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Authentic tools (0) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>An immersive instructional game </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A rich environmental context (50%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Player is constantly engaged (25%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>An emotionally compelling context (19%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Player is constantly interacting with other players (6%) </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Findings - Definitions <ul><li>Engagement in an instructional game </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Player is always thinking (61%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Player is always feeling (19%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Player is always learning (11%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Player is always doing (8%) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Adaptive instructional game </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Adjusts the difficulty of challenges (81%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adjusts the type and frequency of feedback (14%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adjusts amount of information provided (3%) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adjusts type of gaming skills provided (3%) </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Trend There is more variation among responses from the gaming disciplines than the instructional disciplines <ul><li>Instruction has an established science that purposefully allows us to make predications </li></ul><ul><li>Instructional curriculums provide a common field of professional preparation and experience </li></ul><ul><li>Variation in game designer responses will likely decrease as more is learned within the disciplines and preparation programs mature </li></ul><ul><li>This could be a sampling issue – and needs to be verified with future research </li></ul>
  17. 17. Hybrid design model implications <ul><li>Include steps that: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Set learning objective priorities early in the design process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Check adherence to established priorities during the design process throughout design </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Document connections between cognitive requirements and design choices (including fantasy and fun) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Develop strategy regarding whether, when, and how to interrupt game play for instructional reasons </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Develop strategy for evaluating both instruction and game play during development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Gain approval for all changes by lead game and instructional designers </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Conclusions <ul><li>Communication involves more than the simple translation of terms that a Babel fish might offer </li></ul><ul><li>Instructional game design teams need to understand the expectations, principles and research upon which team members base their actions </li></ul><ul><li>Future research needs to focus on further distinctions among disciplines to explore the subtle differences and the rationale behind them </li></ul>
  19. 19. Questions? <ul><li>A Communication Framework: </li></ul><ul><li>A Babel Fish for Instructional Game Designers </li></ul><ul><li>Paper 10394 </li></ul><ul><li>Susan Coleman; </li></ul><ul><li>Ellen Menaker; </li></ul><ul><li>Talib Hussain; </li></ul> Learning Games Community of Interest :