ICT in Practice - Games Based Learning: Theory and Practice

I recently wrote an article in ICT in Practice magazine - Games Based Learning: Theory and Practice.

I won't spoil the read too much suffice to say that it covers ground that we have blogged about here, but it is well worth a read as it works as a nice summary. The article introduces games based learning, discusses our design and development approach, the underpinning learning theory (situated learning) and goes on to present a case study of the use of our Sustainaville product in schools.

The article has got picked on twitter and other blogs. Ryan Schaaf at the Committed Sardine Blog does a particularly nice rewrite.

A demonstration of Sustainaville can be found at http://www.games-ed.co.uk/sustainaville-demo.html

Please follow @paulladley on Twitter, games-ED on Pinterest and like games-ED’sFacebook and Google+ pages for blog updates and interesting games based learning findings.

Part 6: Programming, Project Based Learning and games-ED

Project Based Learning (PBL) is big news in the education world.  I wrote a blog article about the benefits of PBL in March, which you can read here.  I also discussed a new school in the U.S. that used PBL heavily to teach its children, in this article.  It is essentially a way of teaching children things through them completing a project.  They are given a topic or goal and they must complete a project around it.  It is an extremely engaging way of learning that enables children to see the real-world value of the knowledge they gain.

Image courtesy of NMCorg on Flickr.

Teaching children programming lends itself very well to PBL, either at a whole class level, or in smaller groups.  Using the goal of creating a game, children can learn to program along with many other skills (media skills, logic, problem solving, creativity, maths etc.).  The project could also be situated around a subject, which could increase subject matter knowledge in a stealthy way.  For example, a game about history would lead children to learn about that history, for the game to be successful.  The project could also go further and teach children entrepreneurial skills, business skills, marketing skills, social media skills etc. if the game is to be sold and marketed.  Even if it was never to be actually marketed, a hypothetical case could be presented and the children could still learn these skills.

games-ED (which brings you this blog, see tab at top of page for more info) believes that it is important for children to have some understanding of programming.  We also appreciate the myriad of extra skills to be gleaned from teaching children to program and how powerful PBL can be.  The skills that we use to develop games combined with our ability to deliver training enables us to run PBL courses.  We have experience of running 450 workshops and 40 school classes and have previous PBL experience.  For examples, see Climate Crew and Eco Busters.  For more information visit: http://www.games-ed.co.uk/pbl.html.

Please follow @paulladley on Twitter, games-ED on Pinterest and like games-ED’s Facebook and Google+ pages for blog updates and interesting games based learning findings.

10 Benefits of Project Based Learning

Project Based Learning (PBL) is a hot topic in education currently.  PBL is where learning is structured around a project.  The learners must learn what they need to complete the project.  They can find this information by themselves, or they may have formal classes and so on, which help them to complete their projects.

So why is PBL so good?

1. It is extremely motivating.  Learners want to learn in order to complete their project and might even do extra work if it means their project will succeed.
2. PBL can be a lot more hands-on and make the learners feel in control of their learning which is much more engaging than listening to someone talk at you at the front of a room and answering some questions.
3. The learning has built up gradually with a definite result; the learners have something to show at the end of it.
4. PBL can encourage collaboration.  It works well with learners split into project groups or teams.  Collaboration is great for learning and it is an important 21st century skill.
5. It is a great way of ticking other 21st century skill ‘boxes’.  PBL can be a good way of encouraging soft skills such as problem solving, research skills and creativity.
6. Good base for cross-curriculum learning.  A single, broad topic can be used as a project theme and many subjects can be brought into it, which gives them some meaning.  For example, a topic on ancient Greeks could involve history, maths, geography, politics, philosophy, religious education and so on.
7. Projects can be tailored to suit different abilities and if working in groups, people can fill different niches, which could enhance self-esteem.
8. Gives subjects a focus and more of a meaning, ties things together and offers an easy answer to “Why do we need to know this?”
9. It is easy to implement with few resources (but does require a little imagination).
10. Having said that (number 9), there are lots of helpful resources and project plans online.  Have a look at our ‘Learning’ Pinterest board for some great ideas.

How does PBL work in practice?

Well, one example is Climate Crew.  games-ED undertook a project with over 40 young people from 2 schools and a Girl Guides group from St.Helens, Merseyside, UK. The young people were aged between 14 and 18.  The project ran three types of media skills workshops that had a dual purpose: to provide media skills for the young people and to feed into a design of a game.

• Workshop 1 - Creative Skills:
• Theory of logo design > design roughs on paper > designs crated in a vector drawing package.
• The guides developed a flier based on the logo.
• Workshop 2 - Computer Games Design:
• The Schools created initial designs: premise > story > game-play and Easter eggs (hidden features in the game).
• The Guides drew up the screen designs on huge sheets of paper.
• Workshop 3 - Computer Games Build (done using Adobe Flash):
• Game inner working and artificial intelligence 
• Interface, animation and navigation coding
• Avatar design and coding
• Real world interaction 
• Workshop 4 – Testing

Even though the project ran over a number of weeks and multiple sessions, there still wasn’t enough time to teach the young people the varied skills they would need to design and develop a game. The approach we took was to let the young experience the spectrum of roles in a games company, rather than trying to make them expert in any one area.  The game was completed by the facilitators and can be found here.

The young people learned a lot of skills through designing, leading and implementing the project and through the interactive workshops including creative marketing and facilitation, project management, community leadership, computer game design and development.

Before and after the workshops the young people were asked to judge their skills in key areas, some of the data is shown below.  The data shows that the young people gained skills in design and computer game development as well as communication skills. The workshops were ranked very highly by the young people, particularly the final workshop on game development where they saw all of their previous work slot together as they built the game.

Workshop 1

• 47% improvement in understanding the use of logos for communicating ideas.
• 57% improvement in understanding climate change.
• 62% improvement of skills in logo design.
• 51% improvement of skills in graphic design (taking an idea to completed product).
• 31% improvement of skills in using a computer art/design package.
• 23% improvement in communication skills for the verbal presentation of ideas. 

Workshop 2

When asked, “What key learning messages will you take away”, some of the children responded:

• “No idea is a bad one.
• “Bigger understanding of designing games.
• “That we should take our time to think of ideas instead of rushing.
• “That when designing a game it has to be simple but catchy.
• “How to lower my carbon footprint.”

This is a very specific project around games, but you can see easily how similar principles could be used for a project to teach any number of things.  The children loved the experience and learnt a lot and the teachers were full of positive comments too.  For more information and data (including teacher feedback) see ‘Developing Games with Young People: Climate Crew’.

Please follow @paulladley on Twitter and like games-ED’s Pinterest, Facebook and Google+ pages for blog updates and interesting games based learning links and resources.

Gamification - Different Types of User

I was recently pointed in the direction of an blog article from Andrzej Marczewski, ‘Different Types of Users in Gamification’.  Andrzej built on Richard Bartle’s player type theory.  Bartle’s theorised that you could categorise MMO (Massively Multiplayer Online) game players in one of four ways: killer, achiever, socialiser and explorer.  To read Bartle’s full theory, click here.  Andrzej took these ideas and related them to gamification.

Andrzej notes that the important distinction between game players and users of gamified content is that they may not wish to ‘play’.  Andrzej categorises users as: Players, Socialisers, Free Spirits, Achievers and Philanthropists.  Below is his explanation of each:

• Players are the ones who like to get the achievements in your system; they like to see their names on the leaderboards.  They like the “game” of it all. They are also the most likely to make use of “loop holes” to gain an advantage. There to play the game and are happy with the extrinsic rewards.
• Socialisers (as in the original Player Type) are the ones who want to interact with others. They like to be connected to others. They are interested in parts of the system that help them do this. These are the ones will evangelise your internal social networks. Most motivated by the social connectiosn aspects of relatedness.
• Free Spirits like to have agency. They don’t want to be restricted in how they go through their personal journey. They will be the most creative, have the fanciest avatars, create the most personal content, but also find the most holes in a system. They seek self expression and autonomy.
• Achievers are the ones who want to be the best at things, or at least be achieving things within the system. They want to get 100% on the internal learning system. They do this for themselves and are probably not that bothered with then showing off to others about it. (This differs from the original definition, but I could not think of a better word!!). They need a system that will enrich them and lead them towards mastery.
• Philanthropists want to feel that they are of something bigger.  They want to give back to others. These are the ones who will answer endless questions on forums, just because they like to feel they are helping. They want a system that allows them to enrich others and feel a sense of purpose.

So why is this useful?  Andrzej goes on to explain that each of these types prefer to operate in either structured or unstructured ways and for material and non-material gains.  The second part of his blog article extends this idea further explaining how users see rewards, whether they act within the system or not and how they interact with other users.  While the second part of his article gets a little complicated, it is a great tool for anyone thinking of utilising gamification.  Andrzej argues that you must create a balanced system for all users for gamification to be worthwhile and fully useful and he does a lot of the work for you in terms of working out how to do this.

For the first part of the series, visit: http://marczewski.me.uk/2013/01/30/different-types-of-users-in-gamification/
For part two: http://marczewski.me.uk/2013/02/04/user-types-in-gamification-part-2-players/

pixelfountain and its brand, games-ED, who bring this blog to you, develop learning simulations (serious games) to be used in training workshops and in the classroom.  These games are used in training so delegates are not classic game players or have not come to play.  So does Andrzej’s classification hold water in our experience? We would say that we have certainly come across these different types of players in our workshops.

We have come across a significant minority of players, who report that they enjoyed getting the high score or beating the other team – we have on occasion played more than one simulation in an event.  These are Player types.  But the most common type, bearing in mind that the games are used in training workshops, could be thought of as modified Achievers.  Note: Andrzej suggests that people may be a combination of ‘types of user’, but they usually have one main motivator.

The following quotes are just a sample of the feedback we have gained from our latest product, sim-uni (a learning simulation that models a University to train Higher Education employees).

“I think the event/the simulation provided a fun way to learn about the different elements that impact on the running of the University (particularly in raising awareness of areas not directly related to those you may have worked in), and could also be used as a team building event (irrespective of the actual content of the simulation).  It really got you thinking and talking about the issues, and also about the importance of communication (networking and negotiation).”
- E-Learning Manager

This player comes over as being primarily an Achiever.  They enjoyed playing the simulation as it provided a fun way of learning and raising awareness.  I think that secondary to this, they are a Socialiser.  They note that the simulation would be well suited to a team building event, appreciated that sim-uni got them ‘talking about the issues’ and that it highlighted the importance of communication.

“Taking part in the sim-uni event gave me an interesting insight into the way different decisions about admissions policy, budgeting, staffing, research, resources etc are linked and have an effect on a university’s reputation as well as its ability to do its job. The sim could provide value to the whole range of university personnel, to show how they fit in to the big picture, and how the big picture depends on the smaller details.”
- Divisional Manager

This delegate / player is primarily an Achiever. They appreciate the game as it helped them increase their understanding of various issues. They also have a hint of Philanthropy about them. They appreciate the wider goals and the greater purpose and suggest how it could be useful to ‘the whole range of university personnel’.

“The day was a lot of fun.  I enjoyed working with a range of colleagues from across the University (some of whom I had never met before) and once we got a handle on what we were doing, we were able to bring some creativity and ingenuity to the exercise!  The facilitator was engaging and knowledgeable and the whole event definitely got me thinking about how Universities work.

I would definitely recommend the exercise to anyone who is interested in taking part.”
- Head of School Administration

This delegate is a Socialiser and a Free Spirit.  They ‘enjoyed working with a range of colleagues from across the University’ and they ‘were able to bring some creativity and ingenuity to the exercise’.  Their primary motivations seem to be the social aspect of the workshop and they obviously enjoyed how flexible the workshop and simulation were as it allowed them to be creative and autonomous.

“We stepped out of our silos.  It was a great opportunity to view the University operation from a different perspective and to appreciate the value of collaborative working across the organisation.”
- Head of Student Operations

This delegate is an Achiever / Socialiser.  They enjoyed the opportunity to learn, however they also enjoyed socialising and working beyond their silos.

“The ‘Sim-Uni’ event was very engaging and an excellent way for managers (new and established) to learn more about managing and being responsible for budgets.  Through the use of simulated ‘Report Screens’ you could see the impact of your budgetary decisions made year on year, that as a manager can be an invaluable tool helping you to steer the direction of your purchasing decisions and areas of work that impacts on and feeds into the overall achievement of the University’s strategic goals” 
- HR Manager

While this delegate could be seen as a player (due to liking report screens as a guage of progress and achievements); it is more likely they are beind descriptive for the benefit of others. So, I would argue they are an Achiever / Philanthropist as this delegate appreciates the learning outcomes of the learning simulation and workshop above all else.

Andrzej has so far named four user types that are intrinsically motivated in certain ways: Socialiser, Free Spirit, Achiever and Philanthropist.  In his second blog post he discusses how there are four types of extrinsically motivated users of gamified content too: Networker, Exploiter, Consumer and Self-Seeker.

• Self Seekers Act on Users for Extrinsic Reward- They will answer questions and help others, but purely to get rewards from the system. Quantity over quality – unless quality gets them more rewards. They are uninterested in the social aspect of users
• Consumers Act on the System for Extrinsic Reward - A consumer wants to use a system that can give them something. An example would be people who use one particular airway because of the loyalty scheme.
• Networkers Interact with Users for Extrinsic Reward - They want social connections, but to give them some form of status or reward. An example of this are people who network and tweet etc. just to get higher Klout scores
• Exploiters Interact with the System for Extrinsic Reward - Similar in nature to Self Seekers, they are the people who will like or upvote or retweet something multiple times to gain reward. Unlike Free Spirits, who will seek the boundaries of a systems capabilities for fun, they are very likely to find the loopholes in your rules and exploit them

It seems to me that these 8 types of users of gamified content can also be used to describe most of the people we come across in our organisations, if not our lives at large.  And what also seems likely is that people will fit into different categories in different situations.  For example, you might be a Socialiser and Achiever at home, but be a Networker and Consumer at work.  So while these types are important when designing gamified content, they could also be very useful when designing other interventions: training, rewards structures, communications and so on.

For more information about sim-uni, visit: www.sim-uni.co.uk and feel free to let me know your views and experiences in the comments section below.

Please follow @paulladley on Twitter and like games-ED’s Pinterest, Facebook and Google+ pages for blog updates and other interesting games based learning things.

Games Develop Social Bonds and Communication Skills

For a long time, many people have assumed that ‘gamers’ are unsociable, loners with poor social skills who reside in their dark bedrooms, only venturing outside to fulfil their basic needs.  However, research shows that this is far from the truth.

Some research does indicate that playing first person shooters such as Halo and Call of Duty does impact negatively on the players’ relationships.  However, that seems to be more to do with the way that people play games than the games themselves.  Research from Benjamin Hickerson at The Pennsylvania State University has found that some gamers play the game primarily as a way to reinforce social bonds.  In-game features such as cooperative modes and multiplayer options make playing games socially both easy and attractive.  The research shows that among this group of social game players, the games help build social ties and enhance social support.

Hickerson’s research suggests that indicators, such as the amount of time and money spent on games, are not related to gamers’ success in maintaining social ties.  He  argues that “Players may actually be doing something positive when gaming becomes a way for games to connect with friends who they otherwise may not be able to spend time with, especially friends who they are not near geographically.”

Hickerson’s study measured centrality (the need to organise ones’ life around the activity) against social bonding.  ‘Centrality’ scores indicated that on the whole, peoples’ social lives were not adversely affected by gaming, although there were a minority that were implicated.  However, Hickerson believes that games may be able to help.  He argues that this information could help video game designers create games that identify socially problematic behaviours (i.e. excessive centrality) and include features in the games that help the players maintain friendships and relationships.

But do games not already do this?  As well as playing in cooperative and multiplayer modes as I mentioned earlier, experts believe that MMORPGs (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games), may actually “promote sociability and new worldviews.”  Experts have described these virtual worlds as a new kind of ‘third space’ (a place for social interaction and relationships, outside of home and work).  For many people, they are the preferred way of meeting and hanging out with people, when in the past they may have gone to the pub or to a café.  The study titled, “Where Everybody Knows Your (Screen) Name: Online Games as ‘Third Places.’” suggests that the cause of this phenomenon is the lack of real-world hangouts.

In these games, people can hold multiple real-time conversations using text or their voices through microphones.  The study explains that this can enable them to build “relationships of status and solidarity.”  Often, the games reward people for creating long-term relationships and lasting player ‘guilds’ and it can be difficult to play some MMORPGs without doing so.  This is exactly what Hickerson was talking about.

Researchers Steinkuehler and Williams also found that participation in these virtual ‘third places’ “appears particularly well suited to the formation of bridging social capital – social relationships that, while not usually providing deep emotional support, typically function to expose the individual to a diversity of worldviews… In other words… spending time in these social games helps people meet others not like them, even if it doesn’t always lead to strong friendships. That kind of social horizon-broadening has been sorely lacking in American society for decades.”

The authors explain that “To argue that their MMO game play is isolated and passive media consumption that takes the place of informal social engagement is to ignore the nature of what participants actually do behind the computer screen… It’s really a question of what kind of balance the person has in their life… that reason, online spaces are not a one-size-fits-all phenomenon that can simply be labelled ‘good’ or ‘bad.’”

I completely agree, in that the stereotypical view I described in the first paragraph of this post describes very few people who enjoy games.  In my opinion, you could describe many other people in this way who read books, like films, spend their lives on Pinterest and so on.  In my opinion, it is not the activity, but the personality of the individual that defines whether they are sociable or not.

There is much research like that above which shows that games can encourage social interaction and increase social skills and bonds.  Games are increasingly becoming a social activity akin to the past where a family may have gathered around a piano or radio.  You can hardly argue that consoles such as the Wii and Xbox Kinect weren’t designed to be used socially.

One of the factors that actually encourages learning has been found to be social interaction.  Therefore, there is huge scope for cooperative games based learning such as the games in my blog article: ‘Kinect Games Based Learning’ and those that we at games-ED develop.  We have delivered over 450 workshops using games based learning and we find that our simulations are a great tool for encouraging cooperation, teamwork and building bonds.

We also firmly believe that games can be great talking points and can encourage communication skills.  For more research and expertise in this area, see our blog posts: ‘The Art of Conversation’ and ‘Developing Communication Skills via Games Based Learning’.

Resources:

• Hickerson, B., & Mowen, A. (in press). Behavioral and Psychological Involvement of Online Video Gamers: Gateways or Barriers to Social Integration? Society & Leisure.
• Steinkuehler, C., and Williams, D. (2006). Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as “third places.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4), article 1.

Outstanding Lessons and Games Based Learning

For anyone who doesn't know, or who doesn't live in the UK, ‘Ofsted’ stands for The Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills.  They essentially inspect schools (and other children’s services) and grade them based on various criteria.  This has a considerable effect on the school’s reputation.

The top ‘grade’ you can achieve through Ofsted is outstanding and teachers and schools all over the UK are striving to achieve ‘outstanding lessons’.  But what does this mean exactly?  How can games based learning help more lessons to be outstanding?

Outstanding lessons will obviously vary greatly depending on the lesson being taught.  However, what is common to achieving this standard is the quality of teaching and learning.  Ofsted say that outstanding teaching includes “a focus on pupils making exceptional progress as a result of inspiring teaching, from teachers having excellent subject knowledge and the innovative use of new technology” (information from http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/outstanding-lesson-11943).

In other words, one of Ofsted’s main criteria for outstanding lessons is the innovative use of new technologies.  This, in itself, would be a good reason to use games in lessons.  However, if we look at the criteria more closely, we can see how games based learning can tick more than one box.

Outstanding teachers must fulfil the following criteria:

• Subject expertise and flair
• The involvement of every pupil in the learning process
• Intelligent questioning involving every pupil
• The use of a wide variety of resources as appropriate including new technology
• Involving pupils in the learning process and developing independent learning.

For me, it goes without saying that teachers should have a reasonable level of subject expertise.  However, subject flair is a little more interesting and perhaps more difficult to prove.  One cannot impose passion for a subject on teachers but a good way to exhibit it may be to use a related game in lessons.  Being up-to-date on goings on in their field and finding new ways to instil knowledge that they find interesting is impressive and games exhibit this.

Good learning games should also involve every pupil in the learning process.  Games can tap into multiple learning styles (‘Games Based Learning Supports Multiple Learning Styles’) meaning that all children should be able to access the learning at some level.  Collaboration is also a great benefit of learning games.  Although some technology limits the amount of players, the ideal situation is for all pupils to be learning collaboratively from one game (see the pedagogy page of our corporate website).

The next criterion is intelligent questioning involving every pupil.  In my blog post ‘Unorthodox Uses of Games in Education’, I talked about a teacher using Angry Birds to teach his pupils.  Pupils built catapults to launch real life angry birds and all the while the teacher asked them questions about the physics behind what they were doing.  This can also be done with computer based learning games.

The final criterion involves developing independent learning.  This is really about motivating and inspiring pupils.  It is unlikely that children will become enthused about a topic if the lesson is uninspiring and involves a dull presentation with written exercises to follow.  This is the bulk of most education.  Children can become enthused by a topic and want to learn more about it on their own.  If you make something fun, i.e. by using a learning game, surely they are more likely to do this.

Outstanding lessons are judged on teaching practices, but they are also judged on how the students behave in a lesson.  The key factors (from http://www.teachingexpertise.com/articles/outstanding-lesson-11943) include:

• Are the pupils highly engaged?
• Do they move from listening to being positively motivated?
• Do they learn and make progress?
• Do they obviously enjoy the lesson and have fun, and are they keen to discuss what they have learned and what they might be doing in the next lesson?
• Do the pupils ask appropriate (and challenging) questions?
• Do they show a keen interest in the tasks?
• Are they proud of their work?
• Are the pupils involved in deciding any part/content of the next lesson on the topic?

Most (if not all) of these criteria can be met with the use of games based learning as part of the curriculum.  Games are excellent for engaging and motivating students and providing fun and enjoyment (see blog post: ‘Motivation, Motivation, Motivation').  A teacher observing one of our games-ED lessons said:  “The children were fully engaged for all the session and the ‘buzz’ in the room was one of real active learning” (from 'Marrying up to the Situated Learning Theory').  Children also talked to their parents following the session about how much they had enjoyed the learning simulation and what they had learned.  This is obviously a step up from the usual question of “What did you do today at school sweetheart?” being met with the response, “Stuff”.

Games are also a great way of showing progress.  Many games have some sort of score, ratings, badges, achievements and so on to show progress.  A teacher overseeing one of our games-ED lessons commented: “[The children] were genuinely interested to see the impact their purchases had made on the town. They were disappointed to see the results/consequences of their purchases in Year 2 and were keen to rectify them in Year 3!”  One of the pupils in the primary school also commented, “I liked finding out what score you got at the end and looking at the improvements.”  Playing a game multiple times enables you to clearly see skill / knowledge development.

From our experience of running our learning simulations in lessons, all of these criteria can be met.  If you want more of an idea of how learning games can help you achieve outstanding lessons, have a look at these previous blog posts, ‘Marrying up to the Situated Learning Theory’, ‘Proof of the Pudding’ and ‘Proof of the Pudding Part 2’ and have a look at our corporate website: games-ed.co.uk.  There are some demos of our products on there too, if you are interested.

There are obviously other factors that are important for outstanding lessons and using learning games in every lesson would be considered inappropriate.  However, it is extremely easy to see how using games in lessons can show evidence of outstanding teaching.  And more than simply providing evidence, games could achieve these outstanding outcomes for students and make real improvements to the standard of lessons and their learning.

Please follow @paulladley on Twitter, games-ED on Pinterest and like games-ED’s Facebook and Google+ pages for blog updates and other interesting games based learning bits and bobs.