Archive for the '688' Category

New online Monopoly

September 10th, 2009

I remember Monopoly from my youth. We called it Monotony because of the interminable length of game play and how long it took to actually make it around to where you could move. In spite of that, we had a great time playing with all the little pieces. Here’s an interesting bit of news and I think the “Wednesday” referenced was yesterday!

But when I played the new online version this morning I was free from such a driven competitor. Monopoly City Streets, a link up between game owners Hasbro and Google Maps, launches on Wednesday for a four-month period. It enables one, in theory, to buy any street in the world.

via New online Monopoly game is streets ahead | Technology | guardian.co.uk.

Go read the whole piece and maybe I’ll see you in the game.

The game site appears to be overwhelmed. Gee, I wonder why?


Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose

August 31st, 2009

Some of you will have seen this on Remote Access. Clarence’s comment is “A lot of teachers won’t like this.”

Pink has some really interesting ideas in this but the key one has to do with application of intrinsic motivation. We’ve been enamored of Maslow’s “drives-based” theory that we lose track that motivation has some other theories as well, including an instrumentality theory that really addresses intrinsic and extrinsic motivations in a meaningful way.

How do these three ideas – mastery, autonomy, and purpose – relate to education in general? How do we take advantage of this motivation as teachers? And, an important consideration for the Games class, how do you see these three factors feeding into what makes a “good” game?

Discuss.

(Thanks, Clarence. Great Find.)


The Average Gamer?

August 25th, 2009

The link to this article came across in the Twitterverse this morning and I thought it was worth looking at:

Debunking videogame stereotypes, but not necessarily in a good way, a new study into gaming habits has revealed that today’s average games player is not a pallid skinned, socially backward teenager but rather a 35-year-old couch potato prone to bouts of depression when not submerged in the escapism of virtual game worlds.
Via The Tech Herald

As we begin examining some of the so-called findings, it’s often important to look critically at primary sources. The title of this article is catchy, but not exactly accurate. Read the whole story to find out where the mis-leading bit is. And given the red-flag on credibility, one has to wonder what the original study has to say. The article itself doesn’t have a link to the primary … Wonder why.

Compare that story with this one from Yahoo. There’s still no link to the original story, but there’s a very different feel to reporting and even offering ancillary links to amplifying information.

It’s important to keep in mind that most research does not impute causal relationships, merely correlated factors. Do games make you depressed or do you turn to games to fight depression? Weight and depression are often linked but which came first?

Keep a critical eye on this kind of reporting. It’s seldom what it really appears to be.


Anatomy of a Good Post

August 21st, 2009

We’re going to be using the blogs as communications channel this semester and I’m asking all my students to write about things. It occurred to me today that I haven’t really explained what I consider a “good post” might look like. I’ve been modeling them for a couple of years now and, frankly, as instructional technique, it leaves a lot to be desired. So I’m going to do a kind of metacognitive wrapper around what I think of as a good post and explain the critical parts.

So a good post should start out with an explanation of what the heck you’re going to talk about. Now, I’ve done that in the paragraph above, but in a “normal post” I’d probably be talking about something interesting that I found in my aggregator. In that case, I’d start the post with a bit of an intro, then cite a bit of the original post, include a link so you can go read the whole piece, and, after the citation, offer a commentary on what I think are the take-away points. Something like this:


Clarence Fischer up in Snow Lake is one of those people who is constantly using these technologies in his daily classroom practice. He’s in a permanent metacognitive mode about how the tools work, how they influence his practice, how his students relate to them, and the social implications of how that use changes who we all are. Here’s an example from one of his latest posts

Web 2.0 technologies allow us to think about moving the latest, most up to date informtion both in to and out of our classrooms, but we also need to think more dynamically about the connections we are able to make, the networks we can forge and the people we can have the students in our classrooms meet.

via Web 2.0 – For So Much More Than Publishing | Remote Access.

He’s absolutely on the money here. We have to stop thinking that education is about content and start working on the idea that learning is more important than institutions. The problems arise only if we believe in an economy of scarcity and, as Clarence has learned, the real problems arise when trying to organize the avalanche.


Now if my post-citation commentary seems a little obscure, even dense, or perhaps even unrelated, maybe it’s because I’ve written about the whole piece and not just about the bit that I cited.

Or it could be that I think that he’s identified a valid issue with regard to content and that I’m extrapolating from his point on content to an observation about the systems within which that content is (mis)used.

Or it could be that I have my head up my butt and I really have no clue what I’m writing.

Or, perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle, and this whole metacognitive experiment in demonstration is actually an example of what I think might constitute a good post.

How might you tell?


Life in the MUD

November 3rd, 2008

Time flies when you’re having fun. Some of you have noticed that I’ve been in-world at Last Outpost for the last couple of weeks. Teaching in a multiuser environment — especially one so foreign — is a challenge. In this case, literally teaching in the (virtual) town square.

Playing in the MUD requires much more skill and attention than might be guessed from the initial simple introduction. Because it’s text based, there are several advantages to the environment.

First, it’s accessible to almost anybody with a computer and a connection. Even people who are blind or visually impaired can play. People on dialup can play. People with really old, slow computers can play. The barriers to entry are very low and for an educational environment, that’s key. Not just important. Key.

Second, it’s interactive. What you do has an effect in the game. Whether it’s picking up a weapon, donning your armor, learning a spell, or saving your companions, it’s reflected in the game. This is real interaction, not the pseudo-interaction “click here to advance” or “pick the answer that most closely agrees” level of question response. From the time you first stand in Town Square, everything you do has an effect on your character in the game.

Third, it’s multiuser. You are not there alone. One of the earliest computer games was “Adventure in the Colossal Cave” which is actually the antecedent of all modern MUDs. In that, the adventurer solved puzzles, slayed monsters, and explored the cave. From “Adventure” a whole series of single player games called Zork came on the scene and evolved in the early days of personal computers. Dialup networks gave access to similar single player “bbs games” and finally the MUD-engines were developed to provide a full multiuser, persistent game space.

Fourth, all the characteristics of an educational game are in play, except – perhaps – core content. Personally, I maintain that this is an artificial contrivance to make educators feel better about using games but that it cripples their ability to use them effectively — Grendler, notwithstanding. While many things that happen in the game are generated by random number selection, the reality is that the actual game play is almost entirely within the player’s control. If you make a mistake, the game will punish you. If you play well, the game rewards you. The occasional dispute between players — and the occasional interference from ‘pkillers’ who delight in messing up the game play of others — is certainly not random, any more than a fistfight in the back of the playground is random.

Fifth, it’s horribly time consuming. Going through the same instructions for everybody take time as each new player comes up to speed in their own way. Other players in the game are excellent sources of information and more advanced students regularly help those just starting out.

Lessons learned so far:
It doesn’t matter how much instruction, how many resources, or how well the ground is prepared, students don’t pay any attention to it. Several people have asked for more instructions on how to play the game, only to find out that the instructions existed already and they’d ignored them.

A corollary to that is that the game is, in fact, an instantiation of “exploratory learning.” You’re supposed to learn to play the game by playing the game.

One piece of instruction was missing. When following another, the screen goes into a “compact/brief” mode to cut down on the amount of information flowing. This is not necessarily a good thing for somebody trying to learn their way around. It’s easily reversed by typing “compact” to turn it off, and “brief” to reestablish the view.

The reflection papers from 688 were due last night, but the rubric wasn’t available until the evening. I’m looking forward to reading them.


iBrain Research

October 27th, 2008

In what might be the first legitimate inquiry into internet use and brain connections, this story showed up on my Reuters feed this morning:

He said a study of 24 adults as they used the Web found that experienced Internet users showed double the activity in areas of the brain that control decision-making and complex reasoning as Internet beginners.
Is surfing the Internet altering your brain? | Technology | Reuters.

There are some questions I have. The study is very small. The generalization is not clear to me. Is he seeing the increased activity because of the internet? Or is he observing the difference between expert and novice thinking? This is a significant question because it has long been established that novices and experts in any domain have different thought processing patterns.

So, is this finding relevant to internet or just another instance of somebody selling his book by tagging on some well-known snake-oil saleman?


Frustration Outpost

October 16th, 2008

I’m seeing “I’m so frustrated I want to scream” posts on various blogs. This is unfortunate and avoidable. Here are some FAQ’s:

Q. Where are the pictures?
A. This is a text based game. It was designed for low bandwidth/low power gaming. The kinds of situations most teachers face when dealing with populations that are (1) rural, (2) poor, (3) both.

Q. How do I talk?
A. Type “say whatever it is you want to say.” Almost all commands are in the form “verb object” so “say” (the command to the game to repeat what follows to the room) and “whatever you want to say.” will be echoed. You will see the word “Ok.” and not what it is you say.

Q. How do I talk to somebody not in the room with me?
A. Type “tell whoever whatever it is you want to say.” The stipulation is that “whoever” must be logged in and visible to you at the time you “tell.” To find out who is on and visible, use the command “who” to see.

Q. Where am I?
A. Use the command “look” and read the room description. It starts with the room’s name, followed by a description of what the room looks like, a list of people and objects in the room. By using the command “exits” you can see which open doors lead out of the room.

Q. It keeps telling me I’m hungry and thirsty! What do I do?
A. Eat and drink. The MUD is going to demand that you have food and water. Water is available at the well in Town Square, but you’ll need a cup. Food is available in the General Store in the form of iron rations, altho newbies are encouraged to slay the herds in the grasslands and eat the food provided there in the form of mutton, chops, steaks, etc. Clerics can create food and water for people who get caught short.

Q. Are there other commands I should know?
A. Yes. Informational commands like “score,” “inventory,” and “equipment” are critical for keeping track of where you are in terms of score and gear. For a relatively comprehensive list of game commands, use “help” in world to get a list.

Q. I have to log off! What do I do?
A. Go to the Last Resort Inn. Go up to where the Receptionist waits. Type “rent” and take the 0 option from the following menu. This will save your equipment and log you out safely. When you come back in, you’ll start in the reception and be ready to go with everything you had when you left. People who drop link or quit to leave run the risk of coming back naked and unequipped.

The following links have articles that explain more about the environment:

  1. Tips on creating a character
  2. Some background on resources
  3. Some ideas about how the game is controlled in time
  4. Map of the town
  5. Map of the grasslands just outside the gate

Learning Styles, Again.

October 13th, 2008

As I was reviewing some closed discussions on the 688 discussion board, the Learning Styles construct keeps coming up. I’ve written about this in length here, and the link to the most comprehensive refutation is listed in this article:

Several of you have referred to “learning styles” in some of your posts and comments. I know it’s fashionable, but it’s also not supported by any credible scientific evidence. It’s intuitively appealing but it appears to be superstition. For a critique of the extant literature on this see:

Learning Styles.

The question often comes up, given my proviso regarding scientific evidence, “What would you consider credible evidence?”

Answer: Pretty much anything that actually establishes the hypothesis and goes about testing it. Key elements there involve showing that an individual student consistently learns “better” — presumably using some specified outcome assessment — using one mode over another. In order to justify the “Learning Style” theory, that individual student MUST show sigificant improvements across a wide variety of content areas delivered in a variety of modes and therein lies the rub. Whatever design this research takes, it must somehow tease out that causal relationship between the delivery mode and the outcome that’s independent from the repetition.

So? How do you prove that little Mary learns best by hearing? You can’t give her the same lesson in multiple ways, because then any measured improvement is confounded by repetition – which we know has an effect. Further, you can’t be sure that the recoding to cross media from – say – audio to visual is actually the same message so there’s the additional problem in interpreting the messages as to whether or not it’s the repetition, the encoding, or the “learning style” that made the difference.

And it gets more complicated when we factor in a variety of content domains. Teaching “visual learner” Tommy how to read visually is one thing. Teaching him volley ball is another. Credible research would have to account for that.

Yes, I know that learning style theory says that an individual cannot learn using another style, only that they learn best in one, consistent mode, regardless of content or context, and frankly, I’m not buying it. On its surface, there is an intuitive appeal, but when you get into the nuts and bolts of how this thing must have to work if individuals had “learning styles” it seems implausible.


History of Online Worlds

October 10th, 2008

Sometimes we lose sight of history. Raph Koster’s timeline, while perhaps obscure at times, attempts to chronicle the development of an important artifact of our times.

The following is a timeline of significant events for the development of virtual worlds. This has been reprinted at a few places, including MudCenter and Four Below Zero. I welcome more additions to the timeline. Check at the bottom of this for a list of sources.

Raph Kosters Home Page.


The Video Game Revolution

October 9th, 2008

There’s a great conversation swirling around this interactive timeline of video gaming over on the GAMESNETWORK list: The Video Game Revolution: The History of Games | PBS.

The conversation has to do with “why this game instead of another?”

As in any field, there are opinions on both sides.