E19.2176 Simulations and Games for Education

1. E19.2176 Simulations and Games for Education • Jan L. Plass, DMDL • Paul O’Keefe, CREATE

2. Overview • Introductions • Overview: Purpose of Research • Relation to Game Design Model • Types of Research and Related Research Questions • Research on Games for Learning • Play Testing • Design Research • Efficacy Research

3. Overview • Introductions • Overview: Purpose of Research • Relation to Game Design Model • Types of Research and Related Research Questions • Research on Games for Learning • Play Testing • Design Research • Efficacy Research

4. Group Activity • Discuss your ideas for the purpose of research related to games! (15 min., Groups of 3–4) • What research questions are you are interested in? • How could they be addressed?

5. Generate Learning Ideas Generate Gaming Ideas Analyze Requirements Formalize Ideas Evaluate Results Test Ideas Overview • Learning Game Design Model (Plass, 2010) Brainstorming No problems Physical Prototype Digital Prototype Problems with Design Design Documentation Refine and Polish Quality Assurance Educational Effectiveness Production

6. Introduction • Analyze Requirements • Learning Objectives • Profile of Learners • Setting of Use (formal, informal) • Content / Subject to be covered • Type of knowledge desired as outcome (what test is used?) • Competitive Projects

7. Introduction • Learning Ideas • Overall Learning Approach • Function of Game (Prepare Future Learning, Teach Content, Practice Content, Teach 21st Century Skills) • General Level Designs from Learning Perspective • Learning Progressions within Levels • Assessment Requirements

8. Introduction • Gaming Ideas • Overall Conceptual Design • Game Genre • Essential Game Mechanics • Essential Rules • Incentive System (Points, Narrative, ...) • Assessment Mechanisms

9. Introduction • Formalize Design • Integrate Game Design and Learning Design • Link Game Mechanics to Educational Objectives • Link Visual Representations to Educational Objectives • Develop Design Document

10. Introduction • Test Ideas • Repeat Until <Happiness> • Prototype • Play Test • Revise

11. Introduction • Formative Evaluation • Does the game deliver what it was meant to? • All levels of design • Play Test • Outcome Assessment

12. Cognitive Design Factors • Evidence-centered Design • Define educational goals of game • Define outcomes (e.g., desired knowledge of learners) • Define and identify acceptable evidence for learning • Design activities to learn and provide evidence of learning

13. Cognitive Design Factors • Mechanics • Learning Mechanics • Game Mechanics • Assessment Mechanics

14. Affective Design Factors • Emotional Game Design Approach • Emotion and Engagement, Motivation, Interest • Emotion and Cognition • Affective Communication

15. Affective Design Factors • How can learners’ emotions be manipulated in games? • Game Mechanics • Audio • Sound Effects • Musical Score • Visual • Lighting (Color) • Shapes • Tactile • Force feedback controllers

16. Social Design Factors • Social Game Design Factors • Reward systems • Achievement goal orientation and goal structure • Individual and situational interest • Affect • The presence of other players (real, virtual, or imagined) • Self-regulation (promotion and prevention) and depletion • Priming • Goal-setting • Implementation intentions

17. Group Activity • What are challenges and opportunities for Games Research! (15 min., Groups of 3–4) • Consider organizational challenges and game-specific challenges

18. Game Research • Types of Research and Related Research Questions

19. Game Research • Types of Research • Guide Design of New Games • Playtest, Usability of Game Prototypes • Efficacy, Evaluation of Completed Games • Advancement of Theory

20. Research Findings • Molecules & Minds (IES) • Educational Approach • Goal: Compare Discovery Learning v. Direct Instruction • Participants: 93 NYC high school students, 11th grade • Design: 2 x 2 factorial design (Icon v. No Icon, Direct Instruction v. Exploration)

21. Research Findings • Educational Approach • Results: Comprehension • Simulation Exploration > Direct Instruction (d = .47) (Plass et al., 2007)

22. Research Findings • Educational Approach • Results: Transfer • Level of executive functions moderated the treatment effect: • Higher levels of executive functions: Exploration > Direct instruction(d = 2.71) • Lower levels of executive functions: Failed to reach significance (p = .087)Trend: Direct instruction > Exploration(Plass et al., 2007)

23. Research Findings • Molecules & Minds (IES) • Representation Format • Goal: Compare Iconic v. Symbolic Representations • Participants: 93 NYC high school students, 11th grade • Design: 2 x 2 factorial design (Icon v. No Icon, Direct Instruction v. Exploration)

24. Research Findings • Representation Format • Results • Comprehension: Adding Icons increases comprehension, especially for learners withlow prior knowledge and for complex materials(Lee, Plass, & Homer, 2006;Plass et al., 2009)

25. Research Findings • Molecules & Minds (IES) • Simulation Efficacy • Goal: Determine efficacy of simulations integrated in high school classrooms • Participants: 361 high school students (15 classrooms) in NYC, 357 high school students (20 classrooms ) in rural Texas • Design: Simulation Integration v. Non-simulation use (same lesson plans) • Data: Pre/post learning measures, video observations, observer protocols

26. Research Findings • Simulation Efficacy • Results–Texas (rural) • Pre-test revealed higher prior knowledge than NYC students • Simulation group had increased knowledge transfer, self-efficacy, graphing skills • Results–NYC • Pre-test revealed lower prior knowledge than Texas students • Simulation group had increased comprehension, transfer • Higher student engagement in classes using simulations(Plass, Homer, Milne, Jordan, et al., 2009)

27. Research Findings • Factor Reactor Study (G4LI) • Play Mode • Goal: Compare Single Player v. Collaborative v. Competitive Mode • Participants: 63 NYC middle school students, 6-8th grade • Design: factorial design (solo v. collaborative v. competitive)

28. Research Findings • FR Play Mode • Results • Situtional Interest: Solo play was less interesting than competitive and collaborative play. No difference between 2-player modes. • Post-game Performance: competitive game play resulted in better performance than solo and collaborative game play • Math Fluency: Only solo play was superior to competitive play.(Plass et al., 2010)

29. Game Genres • Educational Game Genres

30. Game Genres • Educational Game Genres • Open-ended simulation (sandbox) games • Targeted conceptual games • Professional role-playing games • Multi-user virtual environments (MUVEs) • MMOs

31. Game Genres • Open-ended simulation games (Squire, 2008) • Open-ended worlds • Multiple solution paths • Space for knowledge creation and discovery • Learning as process of coming to understand a system • Ideologial worlds, interpretative communities • Possibility spaces • Intellectual play spaces • Identity places • Learning through social game play

32. Game Genres • Conceptual Play Spaces (Barab et al., 2009) • support empathetic embodiment for complex system • form discourse communities • Conceptual Play=Engagement, involving • character role • party fantastic problem context • apply conceptual understanding to transform context • opportunities to examine impact of participation on context • Quest Atlantis

33. Game Genres • Quest Atlantis (Barab)

34. Game Genres • RiverCity (Dede)

35. Game Genres • Scaffolds (Barab et. al. 2009) • Narrative • Social • Perceptual • Interactive

36. Game Genres • Games and Education • Literacy • Focus on social learning, identity • Exploration and knowledge creation • Legitimate Participation in community of practice • Apprenticeship (reciprocal) • Learning through design & creating new artifacts

37. Game Research • Research Frameworks

38. Research Framework

39. Research Framework • Alternative Knowledge Claims • Postpositivist knowledge • Socially constructed knowledge • Advocacy/Participatory Knowledge • Pragmatic Knowledge

40. Research Framework • Strategies of Inquiry • Qualitative • Ethnographies • Grounded Theory • Case Studies • Phenomenological Research • Narrative Research • Quantitative • Experiments • Quasi-Experiments • Correlational • Mixed Methods

41. Research Framework • Methods • Surveys & Questionnaires • Field observations • Open-ended interviews • Knowledge Tests • Psychometric Scales • Log files • Biometrics • EEG, EKG, EMG, NILS, GSR

42. Overview • Introductions • Overview: Purpose of Research • Relation to Game Design Model • Types of Research and Related Research Questions • Research on Games for Learning • Play Testing • Design Research • Efficacy Research

43. Games Research • Playtesting • Usability Research: evaluate perceived and actual effectiveness of the design • Playtesting: evaluate playability–levels of difficulty, fun, engagement • Typically involves 100...103 participants

44. Games Research • Design Research • Provide guidance for specific design decisions using a variety of methods involving the target audience • Typically involves 101...102 participants

45. Games Research • Efficacy Research • Evaluate the ability of the game to have the intended outcomes–cognitive, affective, or skills outcomes • Typically involves >103 participants

46. Out of Class Activity • Play a game! • Play a computer/console game at home • Study a game! • What research questions do you find interesting exploring in the game you played?