1 / 22

What do serious game players think?

What do serious game players think?. JC Kinnamon Christopher Rousseau R & D Division. PADLA West Chester University. November 13, 2013. Games. John Sweller. vs . Jane McGonigal. Richard Mayer. CON. PRO. Why this topic?. What do... players think?. Why this topic?.

jaguar
Download Presentation

What do serious game players think?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What do serious game players think? JC Kinnamon Christopher Rousseau R & D Division PADLA West Chester University November 13, 2013

  2. Games John Sweller vs. Jane McGonigal Richard Mayer CON PRO

  3. Why this topic? • What do... players think?

  4. Why this topic? • What do... players think? Pedagogical effectiveness

  5. Why this topic? • What do... players think? User acceptance

  6. Game description Skills • Planning • Interviewing • Gathering information • Eliciting cooperation • Challenging lies • Documenting • Reporting out findings

  7. Game samples

  8. Why this game? At this time? Upgrade the learning experience Address “reluctant leaners”

  9. Data Collection Methods Post-experience surveys Concurrent self reports Live observations Remote observation Post-experience debriefings

  10. Data Collection Methods

  11. Subjects

  12. “Serious Game” They had no idea what we were talking about

  13. Cognitive Load Maximize the Content (not actual data) Managed Early challenges Figured things out Designers made changes to lessen extraneous cognitive load

  14. Motivation Game elements were powerful motivators Grabbed pads of paper Restarted Paid attention / checked things

  15. Story Powerful element in the pull of the game Learners were well aware of the narrative Need for closure Be careful—has to be relevant Younger audience had harder time

  16. Reading on-screen text % of on-screen text read is normally low in compulsory training Startling high level witnessed Hawthorne effect? Read when necessary

  17. Engagement Annoyed by technical glitches Little tolerance for distractions Focused on relevant details

  18. Mastering techniques Disclosure Open- ended questions Gaining cooperation General questions before focused questions Planning strategies Challenging lies

  19. Feedback Processed Changed behavior Focused on learning from errors Challenged evaluations

  20. DebriefingsQuotable Quotes • “I couldn’t multitask. I had to stop whatever else I was doing.” • “I had never done an internal investigation before. I want to do one now.” • “I would pick a sim over a lecture; particularly for a skill topic.” • “It was fun. That is not something I thought I would say.” • “It is more valuable to do it vs. hear about it.” • I wouldn’t have thought to use evidence that way. • “It is wonderful to see how it is done. Better than sitting and listening.” • “The game throws you in.... gives an associate a taste of how things happen.” • “If I have the choice of a PowerPoint lecture and a game, I will choose the game.” • “After the first episode I stopped playing a game and I did it like it was real.”

  21. Summary • Acceptance of game approach by professionals • Preference for the approach – 100% • High levels of engagement • High completion rate • Trade-off: Cognitive load vs. motivational factors

  22. Thanks for coming! jckinnamon@pli.edu (212) 824-5813

More Related