Learning Science Meets Game Design

Pride Inhibits Learning

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:40:00 +0000

One must yield to learn. In another post I have partially done I'm likely to touch on this, but this is a good point on it's own. One must yield to the reality of the situation, to whatever and/or whoever is teaching, to accept one's own limitations to surpass them. In essence, to learn, one must be willing to say I can't do it, yet.

Another way to put is, if you're right, you're not wrong. Simple, but profound when applied to ones approach to life. I assume that as a finite being with finite understanding that part of everything I do is wrong. This means that there is always room to improve.

In first grade I new a kid who said he knew everything. He sat in a corner working at the only computer in the room. His math book was huge and I don't doubt that he knew more complex math than I did at the time. That's not to say I wouldn't have been able to understand it. You see, after boasting that he knew everything I asked him why he was there. That confused him. So, I explained that obviously a person who knows everything has no reason to be in school learning anything, as they already know everything. He wasn't pleased with me.

In that situation he yields to the teacher, but was not willing to yield to other students. He assumed the teachers knew more than him and that the other students couldn't measure up. Thus, anything on school subjects had to come from a teacher, not another student. When this belief was confronted in some way, he got mad, rather than concede the point, yield. Later he may have yielded to the reality of the situation, but not to the student who pointed it out.

That may not be the best example, but if you think back on how you were thinking when you made progress learning you should see the pattern. There is overcoming an obstacle in which you yield to the problem and the reality of the situation that how you were doing things was in some way lacking, motivating you to try harder, or try something new. There is also yielding to an instructor or adviser who you think might have something useful to say. If you won't listen, their words aren't as effective.

Sometimes there will be improvement in spite of unyielding pride. That's why the title says pride "inhibits" learning, because that's what it does. Belief in yourself can bolster you hope, and thus your motivation and effort. Refusal to stop trying and putting out effort to improve is dedication. Both are confused as part of pride, since they come in groups sometimes. However, pride says, "I'm better than you/them." This means not accepting help, guidance, advice or reminders. This means you are more likely to make mistakes. Learning from your own mistakes is good, but learning the mistakes of others is better. However if you are prideful you might refuse to implement something because somebody told you to do it.

All in all it is better to be humble and value the work above your pride. That's what I've found.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Acceptance and Tolerance

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 21:12:00 +0000

I would like to share with everybody a comparison of the terms "accept" and "tolerate". It has come up in a game design discussion on Twitter that certain words, acceptance and tolerance, are generally misunderstood, or used, when it comes to the behaviors of others. This started with a tweet saying that somebody had asked their class if they would play a game with a homosexual male hero rather than a heterosexual male hero, and that nobody said they would. Immediately after that came a tweet that called such people "pathetic" for not wanting to play a game with that content as though they were condemning others for their choices by not being willing to act out those choices in a game. Acceptance gets thrown around in these situations, but accepting an idea for yourself isn't the same as accepting the views of another. The latter is tolerance if you don't agree.

So, let's start off with some definitions to give a common ground.

Accept Definition | Definition of Accept at Dictionary.com

"ac⋅cept
–verb (used with object)
1. to take or receive (something offered); receive with approval or favor: to accept a present; to accept a proposal.
2. to agree or consent to; accede to: to accept a treaty; to accept an apology.
3. to respond or answer affirmatively to: to accept an invitation.
4. to undertake the responsibility, duties, honors, etc., of: to accept the office of president.
5. to receive or admit formally, as to a college or club.
6. to accommodate or reconcile oneself to: to accept the situation.
7. to regard as true or sound; believe: to accept a claim; to accept Catholicism.
8. to regard as normal, suitable, or usual.
9. to receive as to meaning; understand.
10. Commerce. to acknowledge, by signature, as calling for payment, and thus to agree to pay, as a draft.
11. (in a deliberative body) to receive as an adequate performance of the duty with which an officer or a committee has been charged; receive for further action: The report of the committee was accepted.
12. to receive or contain (something attached, inserted, etc.): This socket won't accept a three-pronged plug.
13. to receive (a transplanted organ or tissue) without adverse reaction. Compare reject (def. 7).
–verb (used without object)
14. to accept an invitation, gift, position, etc. (sometimes fol. by of)."

If you look, most of that is using the word as positive affirmation of some sort, agreeing with the views stated. However, the big difference between accept like that and accepting the views or choices of another is in what you are saying is true, right, okay and so on. If accept that the sky is blue, that means I now think the sky is blue. If I accept that you think the sky is green with brown spots, that means I now think you think the sky is green with browns spots. It does not mean I agree that the sky is green with brown spots. Why is this important? Well, to say they mean the same is to say that "yes" is the same as "no", which obviously makes it inaccurate in normal uses.

Tolerate Definition | Definition of Tolerate at Dictionary.com

"tol⋅er⋅ate
–verb (used with object), -at⋅ed, -at⋅ing.
1. to allow the existence, presence, practice, or act of without prohibition or hindrance; permit.
2. to endure without repugnance; put up with: I can tolerate laziness, but not incompetence.
3. Medicine/Medical. to endure or resist the action of (a drug, poison, etc.).
4. Obsolete. to experience, undergo, or sustain, as pain or hardship."

So, to tolerate does not mean to agree with or to help, but rather not to take action deliberately against whatever is being tolerated. It's like patriotism. Being a patriot doesn't mean you are against the other groups, but rather that you are for your own group. Put that into views and opinions and you get tolerance of other views and opinions. As an American this hits close to home, as one of the big topics of American history is tolerance of religious, social and other beliefs that don't take away the rights of others. In essence, tolerance means taking a neutral stance of taking no specific effort to help or hinder with no mention of your own beliefs, though the assumed would be that you disagree.

So, the discussion and those words apply to both education and game design via human interaction. Let's look at the conversation as it happened.

Person A: Asked my class if they'd play a game in which a male hero saves a male love interest rather than a female one. No one said yes.

Person B: realy? there are people that pathetic still around these days? depressing

Myself: A lack of interest in playing a particular style of game design or story doesn't make one "pathetic".

Person C: Not particular style, supposedly in modern culture we should be able to accept the difference with a blink of the eye

Another person joined the discussion, while persons A and B did not join the discourse that arose out of their comments. Two ideas seemed hard to get through in it, that one's choice in games to play doesn't necessarily mean anything more than personal preference of games to play and that one can "accept the difference" without agreeing. To the credit of Person C, who with myself did most of the discussing, they considered the ideas rather than just dismissing them. Plenty of people get into the polarized debate mentality which segregates people into allies and enemies. Many people take it a step farther and assume the if you agree with them you are right and if you disagree you are close minded, wrong and possibly stupid. It only gets worse with sensitive topics. That's why I said that it was to the credit of Person C that they didn't close their mind to the possibilities.

Besides the obvious uses in a classroom and game to shape the experience, their is another possibility to use this to help people think in a more open minded and humane way. Each individual has at least one motivation for any particular action. To dismiss that thought, reasoning and views behind another's actions is to think of the person as sub-human. In learning about the views and reasons behind the actions of others, one can come to terms with the idea of tolerating, because that is agreeing to disagree. Doing that requires acceptance of the other person's humanity, intelligence and worth as a human; unless you are thinking of the person as a thing.

That's easily understood as being applied to the "audience", students or players. In the classroom some students need help to understand what comes easily to others, be that extra time from the teacher or something to overcome a disability. The same goes for players. I've worked on a User Interface with Rob Florio and had classes with a person who in high school and college who was barely able to hear and speak. I've also done tutoring since middle school, so my personal view is that everybody has both strengths and weaknesses, but some are more obvious than others. Each person is a human, and individual, with emotions, beliefs, thoughts, reasoning, dreams and motivation.

However, that is the application that shapes the experience while the other application is putting people into situations that challenge how we view life. A great example are the stories where it seems that one of the villains is cruel and ruthless beyond redemption till it becomes known that the person has been having ethical dilemmas the whole way and was misinformed. Would you have been wrong in their shoes? This can also be seen in the stories where you gain understanding as to why the overly-strict teacher, or supervisor, is so strict. Maybe they have their own problems that have mentally and emotionally scarred them. It's also possible they are handling way more than you know or they can easily handle. Maybe they were right to be that strict. History for instance isn't just a bunch of facts and dates, it's the stories of every individual interwoven into a single tapestry. Those who find history most interesting seem to be interested in either the things of the time period or the people.

The two applications have a real effect on our daily lives. Those who do not consider the views of others limit themselves. What would happen if a popular socialite and a tech savvy nerd/geek were to work together and help each other? The one is better with people while the other is better with technology. Those two could easily be the ones behind some awesome events as the tech and social engineering aspects of the events are both taken care of, repeatedly. That's just the start.

When dealing with conflicts, remembering to tolerate people having bad days, misunderstandings and so on will do wonders for you. As a person used to internet forums, I've had discussions that were arguments to the other person, or where they were just having a bad day and I was the final straw. One of my favorite sayings is, "life happens" and the reason is that bad days will come. We should be willing to assume the person was pushed to, and beyond, their limit.

I've been told repeatedly that life is not black and white. Patience, consideration and benefit of the doubt are good things to me, "white" if you will. Jumping to conclusions, not listening and reacting without care are not good things to me, "black" if you will. Together these pieces make a mural of varying shades of gray. There is selfishness in every action we make and some good in them too. The reason is that no person is wholly one or the other. This is part of humanity that we need to remember if we are to be tolerant, and to truly understand tolerance. It's also easily forgotten.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Tools, Tune-ups and Testing

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:11:00 +0000

As typical for an INTJ, I like to make my processes more efficient. To be honest, I'll redesign the process before working on the project. Why, because the process affects the project. The less time focused on the tools and process problems means less wasted time and more focus on the project goals. This is true for both education and games.

Most of today I've been going over the possibility of making Fire Fox act like Flock. There is a lot I like about Flock, but some things I miss about Fire Fox. So, I looked at my tools, started doing some tune-up work and now am testing some of that work. For this post I am using Scribefire like I used Flock to post Social Gaming and Learning. Honestly, I like Scribefire more than Flock's blogging tool, though neither seems to have a way to create and save blog post templates. However, Scribefire has a "notes" feature that could be used to save the template.

Anyways, the point is that wonderful tools in a general sense can be horrible tools in the personal sense. I've blogged about Iteration and Prototyping, and linked to articles that touch on using the right tools. Well, this post is specifically aimed at using the right tools.

While looking for add-ons to Fire Fox I installed and uninstalled some multiple times. The initial settings are always something to look at when picking up a new tool, or add-on in this case. What I found was that some of the add-ons were not well suited to me without customizing the settings. One color codes the tabs, but starts out as just randomly coloring, rather than site based color coding. A little customizing and I now have URL based color coded tabs. That customizing process is akin to an initial tune-up, but that doesn't mean it will always be working great for you. That's when more tune-ups can help. Organization systems are prone to this. In programming there is even a name for it, refactoring. Tools also have this problem, as they commonly have settings and options to customize them to you. Thus, as you change over time, the settings may need to change to better fit you.

The way to figure out when, and what kind of, tune-ups are needed is testing. That's what I'm doing with this post, to test the the new tool I've installed. At this point it seems to be doing fairly well, and like I said, I like it more than the blogging tool in Flock. I'm a little curious about what will happen when I try to publish this, but till I try I won't know. My guess is that it will work, since the preview function said it published, and deleted, a version of this post to set up the preview function for this blog. If it does work, I think I'll pester some people like Jim Groom, Stephen Downes and others working with interesting tools for educational blogging, as Scribefire would work well for research paper type blog posts. This may become a favorite tool of mine for just that kind of posting.

Some of you might notice how this parallels iterative design practices. Seems to me that it's an iterative process refining your tools, their uses and their settings. That's just fine for me. I like experimenting with ideas that might improve how I do things, though one should be careful of volatile situations, for obvious reasons.

After all that, yes I know it's not much, I will point out one of the most important parts of dealing with your tools; take the time to give them tests and tune-ups. It seems obvious now, but when you are done with a project, or starting one, you should take some time for this. After a project is done you should have information from the project, and hopefully more coming in as user feedback, to work with. At the start of a project you should make sure your tools will be able to do the basics of what you want, and should be easy enough to create a mock-up with. If you can find somebody who knows what they are doing, and are willing to help, it would likely help your project to have them advise you on how to improve your process. Sometimes it is a little change, with no math based proof, that will improve team moral and the quality of the project.

One aspect that shouldn't be overlooked is user participation in the process. User feedback is better than technician, designer and developer feedback. Having real users try your project results will give you the most relevant testing results. They may not be very clear, but they will be relevant. This is especially important in the game and education fields, as user perceptions and results are the main focus.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

The Candle Problem Of Pen And Paper

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 20:20:00 +0000

Levels and experience are possibly one of the worst things for creative play. If you haven't watched the TED Talk by Dan Pink on motivation, you should, or this post will not make as much sense.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html

For a while now I have been playing with some concepts for tabletop game designs for play and to help writers. This was inspired by the help of random content generators. If random content could help with the blank canvas problem, maybe there was more that could be done. The content generators weren't up to the idea I had as is, but a flexible framework for exploring possibilities based on die rolls, now that had possibilities to me. So, I started looking into the changes needed to create a tabletop role-playing game for writers.

I mention this because there are times where I had to completely redesign the basic direction of the systems. This was centered on motivators without the intention. As I watched the TED Talk for the second time I realized the connection between my design efforts and the results of the Candle Problem. Motivation was a part of it, but I had yet to see the scope of it.

To pull this together, let's look at the reason I dropped levels, experience and "balance". Levels and balance are like the box and holding the tacks. Experience points are the rewards that push functional fixedness ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_fixedness ). Most of the skills, feats, abilities and other things are combat rules. That means the presented function is combat. The rewards come from combat for the most part in most games with levels. So, to encourage a more varied type of gameplay, levels, experience and such were dropped for a more realistic modeling style. You want it, build it. Sometimes there is a master and an apprentice working together, which might throw off the balance. The result is the stereo-typical D&D/d20 style games has a group of similar level, mostly same level, characters as a group that focus on fights.

Don't get me wrong here. I like a good fight in a game, but that style of fight is only sometimes good. Since I like to play odd characters, like a defensive swordsman/diplomat/medic, I've come across the limitation of most well known systems. What did he do in a fight? Attack, defend, move? He was careful and used his brain. This kind of character pushes for a more interesting and creative experience. He doesn't blindly walk into the traps, enrage NPCs without forethought and so on. Such characters are also a PAIN to create using standard rules, unless they are specialists or stereo-tpes. That particular example actually require GM approved alteration and almost excessive use of house rules to create. Simply put, they don't fit well with the levels and balance of the game.

While it is entirely possible to create an amazing, interesting and deep gameplay with the combat focused rules, that doesn't mean the system encourages that kind of play. The different systems each have their own flavor. Some are amazingly versatile and some are niche games. So, how you present the system, how the system works, what's defined by the system and so on affect how the players and GMs deal with your game. It's just like the two versions of the Candle Problem shown in the TED Talk. When all the pieces are laid out and it's a very mechanical problem, incentives and rewards work well, but when the cognitive and creative aspects are the more important the incentives are likely to be a hindrance.

System Does Matter: http://www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/system_does_matter.html
Deliberation and Intuition: http://socialbrain.rsablogs.org.uk/tag/candle-problem/

There is a type of tabletop games, sometimes called story games, where the focus in on the interactions of the play with combat merely being another form of interaction. Fudge, FATE, PDQ, Travellers and probably HERO are such games. FATE has "aspects" of the character that have both positive and negative effect throughout gameplay, and are the main way to earn FATE points. Those points are used to do really cool stuff in the game. PDQ has "upshifts" which boils down to a roll bonus for "graphic, flavorful, and entertaining" description of an action. Both can be used in and out of combat. HERO actually covers contacts as a part of the system. Thus, the gameplay adapts to the individual game, and encourages immersion.

The other part is that the players play the way they do for the love of the game, story and characters more than anything else. Sure, some of the specifics may be due to the rules, but they normally don't get in the way of story so much as tweak it. Maybe your character costs too much for the HERO game, or the "aspects" don't quite work out for the FATE game, but those normally aren't horrible problems as much as changing a couple things. Perhaps your character just needs to be younger or less trained to fit. None of these are giant problems or fixes. Besides a character "fitting" the game, there is just taking the game through its natural course. Sometimes it's fighting, sometimes it's dialogue and sometimes it's something else entirely. Since there isn't a "fight to get experience" style to the games, the players are looking for fights when they want to get into fights. If they want their character to progress, this style gives fewer restrictions and rewards creativity.

This difference may not seem like much, but let's consider the way a person might attack another person in a fight. The combat oriented way a person moves into range and says they are attacking with a certain weapon, or other means of attack. The attack resolves and the game continues. It's not till you get creative that it becomes a lot of fun. Somebody using telekinesis to counter a rocket with say, a rock, now that's interesting. A medic who is trained in close quarters combat using the tools of their trade to face the opposition, that's interesting. Then there is the combat that is generated when combat isn't all about attacking the enemy directly. Hand to hand combat that goes beyond simple rule usage because you are trained in a particular fighting style adds flavor and alters the results.

Another thing is that if you really want experience points, it should be a reward for what you want to encourage in a way that makes sense. Say an archer is facing a dragon, with the aid of his/her party. The archer shoots a single explosive arrow into the dragon's mouth and blows out the dragons throat. How much experience is that worth? Seems like that should get a reward for creativity, but maybe that reward should be mostly gold, items and reputation. Maybe the experience should be earned for pulling that to save the party? Maybe there should be more experience for the grueling adventures and situation? Personally, I don't like the linear growth systems that are linked to game balance, because they do so many things badly. Who you are, and how you think affects how you grow, and how much, so personalities and approaches make a big difference.

Personality types have come up in my design attempts, but the reason I bring them up here is because of a question, "Does it work?" It's not in reference to personality types and profiling, but it's also a question constantly asked by the personality type I seem to be. Lateral thinking, creative solutions and such are commonplace for the personality type, by what I've read, and so there might be something to the personality type's approach to problems that could help everybody.

"INTJs are perfectionists, with a seemingly endless capacity for improving upon anything that takes their interest. What prevents them from becoming chronically bogged down in this pursuit of perfection is the pragmatism so characteristic of the type: INTJs apply (often ruthlessly) the criterion "Does it work?" to everything from their own research efforts to the prevailing social norms. This in turn produces an unusual independence of mind, freeing the INTJ from the constraints of authority, convention, or sentiment for its own sake."
- http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/psychology/alt.psychology.personality/profiles/intj.html

The following three articles are wonderful at describing how to apply the concept. First is an article covering some common problems in Flash games. The second is about a project where game prototypes were created in under 7 days most of the time. The third is a Gamasutra article called "Practical Tips for Independent Game Developers". In all of them there is a sense of asking, "Does it work?" about each piece of the process and product.

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/GregMcClanahan/20090723/2561/Fatal_Flaws_in_Flash_Game_Design_and_Development.php

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20051026/gabler_01.shtml

http://www.gamedev.net/reference/business/features/indieTips/page4.asp

More can be found in this direction in a couple posts I've made about Iterative Design.
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2009/07/parallel-prototype-iteration.html

http://blog.igenoukan.com/2008/10/iteration-and-prototyping.html

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

To Save, or Not to Save

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 05:22:00 +0000

I just read two blog post I found through the #gamedesign hash tag on Twitter. The two posts deal with saving in games and the implications of different ways to handle it. The first post advocates splitting up the gameplay and the saving system, while the second post says that it can be advantageous to put progress at risk between saves. The rest of this post will tell you where I stand on this, and might inform you on the topic.

When it comes to saving systems, I've seen of plenty of types and times where they've gone wrong. Watching somebody save their game AFTER making a choice that leads to a game over, on the second disc out of four, is something that sticks with a game designer. However, there are other problems like forcing a player to choose between playing for another 20 - 30 minutes or loosing the last 30 - 90 minutes of progress. Some might say that loosing a half hour or more of progress due to a couple mistakes is a problem. I tend to agree, but for very specific reasons.

The first kind of saving system is actually no saving at all. This kind is really only suitable for the kind of game you could play through in a single sitting. The difference between the two opinions in the two posts is evident even when there is no possibility to save. That's because the choice to have no saving for the length of time and possibility that the player will have to repeat most of the game over and over to beat it. How long is too long for this option? That question is at the heart of this matter.

If you have a saving system, it will usually have either pre-set or custom choices for when and what you can save. One of the simplest systems is password, or codes, that you earn through play that tell the game what state to start you at. In some ways the "saved game" is a more complex and automated version of that system. The original is strictly a pre-set when and pre-set what. If you wanted to get really technical ALL saving systems are like that, but for this comparison the pre-sets are very limited while the custom choices represents a wider variety. Since the codes told the game to load a particular state, such as the start of the fourth level, only the places you've fully beat are "saved" when you beat them.

From there the saving systems get more complex giving options. Perhaps you are allowed to save only at particular locations, from in a menu or maybe anywhere on the map. At those times/locations, you may be able to save what you've fully beaten, partially beaten, your inventory, money total, win record and untold other things based on the game. There are certain times, like during a complicated task, that you aren't likely to be allowed to save, or aren't allowed to save the progress in that task. Boss fights and some puzzles are like that for the sake of the gameplay. It doesn't work well to load a game you haven't played for a while and find yourself in the middle of a tough boss fight. However, this brings up the temporary save, which is basically an extended pause. You can stop there, and pick it back up later, but after starting you don't restart there again.

Honestly, I don't think progress risk should be a part of the weightiness and tension that gives a players actions value and importance. That reason is that the actions with value are usually tasks, as mentioned above. A boss fight is a single task the player is supposed to succeed at to continue farther. These task are what I think the author of the second post I linked to was talking about. Sometimes it is a level, and sometimes it's however much the player wants within reason. Mario games with a halfway point and finish are one example used that fits as a task. A saved game says how much has been beaten, but each level is a task with rules. You have to beat the level within a certain number of lives or restart, as a difficulty modifier for the task.

Not all games are made up entirely of tasks, which is what the first post seemed to be saying. Walking through a field, defeating endlessly respawning enemies and cutscenes aren't tasks like those mentioned above. Who cares when you save when outside of tasks? It's like being able to plat the paths between levels of the old 2D Mario games like levels. Beating the "levels" is accomplishing tasks, getting to those levels isn't a task in the original format. If you make getting to those levels tasks in their own right they become levels. At that point the gameplay takes a different tone. Perhaps it means you have to manually traverse the map lots of times. Perhaps it means that you gain free access to other levels, like the original gameplay already had, only with more levels.

The second post mentions game balance as one of the reasons to put progress at risk, but I find the two posts to be arguing the same point with different unstated assumptions and points of view. The first is from the angle of when there should be more opportunities to save, and the second is from the angle of when limiting those opportunities can help the gameplay and game design. Both acknowledge that limiting the opportunities to save "too much" is a bad thing. Finding the sweat spot between "too much" and "too little" is what balancing is for. Considering the medium and how the player is going to play your game is part of the balancing that the first article is stressing. On a mobile game, saving is important, because you may be playing for a short or long time. Like all other aspects of game design, what works best depends on what you are aiming for. However, outside of "tasks", which can be reasonably completed within a single sitting, it can be necessary to allow saving to prevent player frustration. Maybe that time is only in the menu and task selection screen, and maybe you can save at any time including during the tasks. Maybe you can't save between every task, though this is generally my suggestion as loosing progression through tasks you've already completed can frustrate and bore players, as well as make those parts loose their value to the player, but the big thing is to let your players save enough to make the gaming experience, dealing with the real world, fun.

Here are some quotes from the articles that cover what I said, probably more concisely that I did.

"Single-play sessions are difficult to design for, because exactly how long they will last is completely unknown." - 1st

"Simply, players should be able to stop playing a game at any point without fear of losing significant progress. To do anything else is to be disrespectful of your audience's time. It's absurd to require the player to wall off a section of their day to play your game." - 1st

"A game designer can promote player tension and create a sense of danger through challenging gameplay and the careful use of failure conditions and responses. When a failure condition is met the game will respond by penalizing the player in some fashion, often through the loss of progress. Thus, the player might be forced to replay certain parts of the game or be presented with an extended challenge as a penalty." - 2nd

"If having that save anywhere/anytime is problematic to the game's design, providing a single "bookmark" save slot that is deleted after it's loaded is sufficient." - 1st

"A reasonable penalty can make the game more challenging and exciting, but too large a penalty will lead to player frustration." - 2nd

"If you're forcing players to repeat swaths of your game as a consequence for failure, something has gone off the rails." - 1st

"We've all seen it. It's the save point just before massive, unskippable cutscenes that rolls immediately into a very difficult boss fight. It's the failure that forces you to perform the exact same series of actions again and again. These things don't make the game more challenging, they don't make it more interesting, they simply make the game more frustrating." - 1st

"It is the game designer's job to achieve the proper balance between creating tension and avoiding player frustration." - 2nd

The saving system is but one part of the game design that must work well with the rest to provide the best gameplay experience for the player. It is entirely possible to be respectful to the game design and the player, and we should strive to as that is how we cane achieve the best gameplay experience, where the gamed design and player combine to generate "fun".

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Social Gaming and Learning

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 01:26:00 +0000

I'm typing up this post in a browser specially made for social networking called Flock, and I generally like it. Playing with the features got me thinking about some of the things I've heard about concerning games and education, the social aspects of course.

First, there is the education, because that is what I've been hearing more social stuff coming from by way of informal forms of learning. I could see tools like Flock being used for courses and classes using social aspects of the web; Twitter, blogging, e-mail, maybe Diigo in the future.

Second is the possibility for "social gaming" though I haven't looked too much into it. I think there is great strides to be made in making games social activities, but to really do something with social games there has to be a way to do it. Flock is merely one example of the tools that are coming out that could be used to great effect.

There are possibilities, but I think the coolest part is the idea of a social networking dashboard. I'll admit that a part of me cringes at the thought of have my log in information stored in my browser, but I'm like that. I like the idea of being able to got online and just participate. Posting in all my online social communities, and having them listed out so I don't forget them. I'm like that too sometimes. There are a few things I would change, but these tools are in there infancy so I'll give them some time and see what they grow into.

Personally, I'd really like to see something like an e-mail dashboard that incorporates all the different APIs for popular social tools like forums, wikis, blogs, e-mail and feeds, only in a more co-operative way. Speaking of feeds, I wonder if that is really the way to go to make this stuff work; feeds and pings. How about forums thread feeds being used like blogs feeds are used? Wiki pages and so on now all seem to have feeds for changes and such, so it makes sense to me to build a feed reader that informs the user like an e-mail dashboard does. Add some multicategory/tag-based organization for all that stuff and it could be something really useful.

How could we use such a thing in our daily lives, as students, teachers, designers, developers, consumers, journalists, socialites and more? Or, better yet, how do we keep it all organized? See that's where the tag and category idea comes to mind. Tag it to organize it, and grab it when it's relevant. Having a business meeting? Tell the dashboard the right tags to lookk for and have it bring the links and accounts to you. Have a MMO group thing going on? Put in the right tags and find all those resources, friends and communication tools you have prepared for just such an occation.

Wait. I see a slight issue here, or is it? Normally you have to go and log into a service, use there individual systems for each item you want to have "prepared". However, if you have something like a dashboard through which you normally deal with your social services, and it also submits actions and content to multiple services as you want, it might not be a problem. How about the tag search looking through image collections, blogs, feeds and bookmarks you have on your social services? How might games and education use such a dashboard? I think there are definite possibilities.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Where to Next?

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 03:48:00 +0000

I was reading OLDaily, the August 30th "issue", and came across Stephen Downes reflecting on several things. Reading it I was surprised to read that he is "daunted by the scale of it", with it being, "some work of significance and relevance" and "what needs doing". The first thought to go through my mind, besides being surprised, was that I would really like to get him involved in my effort. However, all I know of to effectively accomplish that is to post this. Most likely he'll read this, based on his scripts that look for "@Downes" and such.

Now, before going any further I will quote his post and the comment that I couldn't figure out how to make on his post.

"Reflecting
Home from camping, getting ready for Ars Electronica, and after that, a very busy fall spent mostly at home in Moncton, I'm thinking about projects and directions and my place in the world. It's all OK, but I do want to begin producing some work of significance and relevance - things I feel have escaped me thus far. I have a sense of what needs doing, but am daunted by the scale of it."
- Stephen Downes, August 30, 2009

And here's my comment/response.

"I know the feeling. However, I would point out something. At least you have reputation and some sway with people. As a college student half-way through a CS degree, with no relevant paid work experience and trying to tackle both the problems in education and educational video games, I offer up this bit of encouragement. With a group of determined, creative individuals with open minds, almost anything is possible.

If we could get a few of us together without the current responsibilities getting in the way too much, something seriously worth while could be created. That was actually part of the reason behind Edubacon. With the right kind of people gathered together, discussing how to take the next couple steps towards ours respective goals, the distance can be covered one day at a time. That's why I started blogging about combining learning science and game design in the first place and continue to due so. That's why I convinced Jim Groom to help me create Edubacon. That's why I have applied for The Mind Trust's Education Entrepreneur Fellowship twice, and intend to again when I get the chance despite being rejected twice. Maybe we should talk sometime about how to get this stuff to happen, and maybe we can help each other overcome the obstacles we face.

Sincerely,
Steven Egan"

I've posted before about being unable to attend the normal conferences, though I was able to watch some of the Open Education Conference and participated a little via Twitter. The more I think about the current state of my life, the less likely it seems that I can do anything, until I remember that I am regularly doing things in unlikely ways. However, getting the people that have been known for years in their fields to listen to a college student seems a little hard to believe at times. I haven't been researching, working or something else in the field for years to gain experience. Instead I'm coming out of the blue and asking. Who knows, maybe that will be enough with what I've posted over the last year.

What I do know is that I would love to have a conversation with Stephen Downes, David Wiley, Gardner Campbell and a bunch of the other people I hear about in the part of the edublogshere that I pay attention to. As usual I am looking into some ideas I have to accomplish my goals, but without cooperation they are not likely to succeed.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

A Student's Cry: "When will I use this in REAL life?"

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 07:26:00 +0000

INTRODUCTION:
As a student and game designer I am trying to understand and solve the problems I face in education, and my life long learning goals. While I have my opinions and ideas for possible solutions, they mean nothing if teachers, students, policy makers and the general public are unwilling to open their minds to challenge themselves, their systems and their futures. I am but one person, and such cannot implement true solutions alone.

Economy is about flow with effects, and the flow of knowledge can have many, many effects. The flow of information is based on communication. There are more than one form of communication, and each has many possible problems. Those problems need to be addressed for the sake of students and the future. That's what this is all about; the economy of information and dealing with the question voiced in so many variations, by so many students. However, more than that, I ask, when will you use THIS in real life? A solution never implemented is as helpful as advice never heard.

THE QUESTION:
For years students have asked when a particular piece of information, a particular skill or way of understanding would possibly be used in real life. This is a question of value. The question asks about the value of what's being taught. Is there any reason to go through the unpleasantness of learning what's being taught? It also says that the students don't see a reason, want to hear why you think it is worth knowing or want to compare their own views with what you say. It's not enough to just share the information. It never has been, and never will be. Humans aren't that simple.

Merely having a goal doesn't generate motivation. Knowing in one's head that something is good for one's self doesn't always motivate sufficiently. There has to be a desire, a personal goal. For me, learning something fascinating or useful can be enough, because I desire to learn such things. However, the limit to my motivation in those situations is the limit of my desire to attain those goals. For many people, the question mentioned is a search for motivation. They are assessing whether there is a good, motivating, reason to apply themselves. While abstractness can help make an idea more flexible, it also distances it from application. How the abstract can be applied is where the motivation is likely to be found, because that's how personal goals can be reached.

THE PROBLEM:
The problem is not that people have reason to ask the question in the first place, but that the lesson hasn't been learned by those being asked. After being asked many times how to eat a particular food, it makes sense to change things around to help those asking. Then they might understand how to eat the food before they attempt it. However, an explanation without application doesn't work well for many people. I know because I've tried to explain ideas in this fashion. It doesn't work. Explanation without application is as bad, or worse than, application without information.

Let's continue with the food example. After putting up posters that show people eating the food, the owners might receive fewer questions. The reason is that the customers receive the information in a situation where they are interested, have the ability to try it and can easily review the information while making attempts. This is one of the reasons that video games are considered a good vehicle for education, because the difficulty balancing and in-game help specifically address this aspect of teaching and learning. If a person can't understand the game well enough to have fun, they aren't likely to play.

The only real difference in such a situation is access to quality materials when the content is useful. Some might point out textbooks, to which most students and some teachers might laugh, raise an eyebrow or make rude comments. Simply put, textbooks are not very good for the most part. There are exceptions, but those exceptions aren't used enough. Textbooks seem to have the most usefulness as reference materials, not teaching aids. Web based materials can be a big help, when they can be used for more than small quotes, and are actually of good quality, easy to use, have the information you need and you're allowed to use them.

THE MOMENT:
Rather than talk about a particular solution to the "problem", it seems more important to define the moment in which students learn. Since each student is different, it can require different stimulus and situations to bring about that moment. As stated before, I'm writing this as a student.

First of all there is a desire, for whatever reason, to be able to do or learn something. This is the push to grow and change in a way that allows you to improve. It's not always pleasant or comfortable, but it's a part of the moment. Normally this is called motivation. Both of the following links cover motivation in more depth.

http://edubacon.com/2009/06/08/weekly-special-motivating-learners/

http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content2/Student_motivatation.html

There is also the situation, which consists of preparation and context. Preparation is the lead up in concepts, understanding and experiences that provide the learner with the mental constructs needed to "get" the new skill, concept or material. The context is made up of external things like surroundings, people and expectations that can help and/or hinder the process.

When the preparation, context and motivation all contribute to the process there is a good chance learning will occur. Yes, that is an oversimplification and no, I will not make any guarantees. This is a general description of the moment when learning happens. If the learner is not willing, it becomes highly unlikely they will learn. If they want to learn, there's a pretty good chance it can happen. To be able to build the new mental structure, behavior, they need conceptual building blocks. Without sufficient mental resources it becomes unlikely the student will learn. The surroundings, attitudes and approach can discourage and misdirect, or encourage and guide. That's about it, so far as I have found.

THE REALITY:
The goals of students and teachers don't match. It's much like the goals of game designers and game players not matching.

"#7 The Player Does What's Efficient, Not What's Fun"

That's the title of an article section that I will quote below. We could replace fun with educational, learn, or beneficial, for educational endeavors. Along the same lines, game could be replaced by class, curriculum, course or a handful of other terms. So, please keep that in mind.

"Your goal is to make a game that is fun. But somewhat contrary to intuition, having fun is NOT the goal of the player. The goal of the player is to conquer whatever the game throws at them. Fun is the expected byproduct of this endeavor. The player wants to have fun without having to seek it out.

The player will do what is most efficient and effective, short of doing what they perceive as cheating. Consider a side-scrolling brawler where the player has two attacks. The first attack causes the character to leap into the air, dive down onto an enemy, grab him, spin him around, then toss him into a group of other enemies, knocking them down. A developer could put quite a lot of time into tweaking this maneuver, and have lots of fun executing it during playtesting. The second attack is a simple punch.

But here's the problem – the simple punch deals five times the damage. Why would the player bother using the former attack when the punch is so effective? "Because it's so much fun!" the developer would interject. Then why are you not forcing the player to use it?

We've all played a game like this. We're having lots of fun using a bunch of really cool attacks, abilities, maneuvers, etc. Then we find the infinite ammo rocket launcher that kills everything onscreen instantly, and the game is suddenly less fun. But why? We could always choose to put the weapon away. The problem is that manually handicapping ourselves within the game's rule structure is not fun either.

When testing your game, play it to win. Don't play it to have fun. It's your job to make sure that the two overlap.

There are exceptions to this, of course, where players will just mess around with a game to have fun rather than to progress. But the players who reach this point of exception are the people who are already hooked into your game. It's the new players who need to be won over. Force them to have fun, whether they like it or not!"
- http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/GregMcClanahan/20090723/2561/Fatal_Flaws_in_Flash_Game_Design_and_Development.php

Basically, the goal(s) of the people who create the system is/are the means to the users achieving their own goal(s). As such, the stuff used to achieve educational goals should be created with the goals of students in mind. Most are aiming for the grade, to get a degree, to get a job, to live a financially stable life, among other goals. Sure they may be interested in learning and understanding the topic, but the larger system values the grade, as evidence of content mastery. Unfortunately, learning is NOT the primary goal of a student, it's getting good grades.

While some students really want to learn, they won't need special treatment near as much if the means of getting a good grade is actually showing content mastery. By forcing the average student to learn to succeed, the students who want to learn are likely in a better position to succeed.

If students need to do homework as practice, reward it accordingly. What's the point of practice? The point is to do the action repeatedly, because it makes it easier to remember and gives experience. Accuracy is nowhere in the value of practice. Instead, it's all about participation, so rewarding participation makes sense. A little participation grade and quality feedback is the format I have seen as the most effective model for practice homework.

"De-emphasizing Grades

Emphasize mastery and learning rather than grades. Ames and Ames (1990) report on two secondary school math teachers. One teacher graded every homework assignment and counted homework as 30 percent of a student's final grade. The second teacher told students to spend a fixed amount of time on their homework (thirty minutes a night) and to bring questions to class about problems they could not complete. This teacher graded homework as satisfactory or unsatisfactory, gave students the opportunity to redo their assignments, and counted homework as 10 percent of the final grade. Although homework was a smaller part of the course grade, this second teacher was more successful in motivating students to turn in their homework." ... "Mistakes were viewed as acceptable and something to learn from.

Researchers recommend de-emphasizing grading by eliminating complex systems of credit points; they also advise against trying to use grades to control nonacademic behavior (for example, lowering grades for missed classes) (Forsyth and McMillan, 1991; Lowman 1990). Instead, assign ungraded written work, stress the personal satisfaction of doing assignments, and help students measure their progress."

Just as a note, ungraded assignments like this also give a great opportunity to understand the less standard students. If a note explaining why the assignment wasn't done is just as acceptable as the ungraded assignment, student - teacher communication becomes a bigger part of the class structure. Similar notes could also be made a part of all class work. To make this more effective, I'd suggest passing the notes back with a response.

"Design tests that encourage the kind of learning you want students to achieve. Many students will learn whatever is necessary to get the grades they desire. If you base your tests on memorizing details, students will focus on memorizing facts. If your tests stress the synthesis and evaluation of information, students will be motivated to practice those skills when they study. (Source: McKeachie, 1986)

Avoid using grades as threats. As McKeachie (1986) points out, the threat of low grades may prompt some students to work hard, but other students may resort to academic dishonesty, excuses for late work, and other counterproductive behavior.

Motivating Students by Responding to Their Work

Give students feedback as quickly as possible. Return tests and papers promptly, and reward success publicly and immediately. Give students some indication of how well they have done and how to improve. Rewards can be as simple as saying a student's response was good, with an indication of why it was good, or mentioning the names of contributors: "Cherry's point about pollution really synthesized the ideas we had been discussing." (Source: Cashin, 1979)

Reward success. Both positive and negative comments influence motivation, but research consistently indicates that students are more affected by positive feedback and success. "

...

"Be specific when giving negative feedback. Negative feedback is very powerful and can lead to a negative class atmosphere. Whenever you identify a student's weakness, make it clear that your comments relate to a particular task or performance, not to the student as a person. Try to cushion negative comments with a compliment about aspects of the task in which the student succeeded. (Source: Cashin, 1979)"

Another note, making it clear what is wrong and how to correct it is a big part of this. If you are willing to help fix the problem, it helps you, the teacher, come across as caring about the student's success. I've had teachers refuse to help, and it normally comes across as, "I don't care." If the student needs to figure it out for them self, tell them that and give what assistance you can without giving away the answer.

"Avoid demeaning comments. Many students in your class may be anxious about their performance and abilities. Be sensitive to how you phrase your comments and avoid offhand remarks that might prick their feelings of inadequacy.

Avoid giving in to students' pleas for "the answer" to homework problems. When you simply give struggling students the solution, you rob them of the chance to think for themselves. Use a more productive approach (adapted from Fiore, 1985):

* Ask the students for one possible approach to the problem.
* Gently brush aside students’ anxiety about not getting the answer by refocusing their attention on the problem at hand.
* Ask the students to build on what they do know about the problem.
* Resist answering the question "is this right?" Suggest to the students a way to check the answer for themselves.
* Praise the students for small, independent steps.

If you follow these steps, your students will learn that it is all right not to have an instant answer. They will also learn to develop greater patience and to work at their own pace. And by working through the problem, students will experience a sense of achievement and confidence that will increase their motivation to learn."
- http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/motiv.htm

THE SYSTEM:
As a game designer I occasionally look for good articles on game design. Recently I've bee looking more into tabletop role-playing games. Dungeons & Dragons is likely the most well known example, but it is only one type of such games. Depending on the people you talk with, the game could be described as the precursor to hack & slash video games to a wonderful collaborative storytelling game. However, there is something to note about any game, the system and rules matter. In one article I found ( http://www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/system_does_matter.html ) the author describes three types of goals for the experience and three types of mechanics to achieve those goals. With that in mind the author concludes that the worst thing you can do is try to be all things to all people, though I disagree on that point.

The reason I disagree is that a system could give the tools to adapt the system to different types of goals and mechanics. Such a system would be an adapting system that allows for customization as needed, without the experience and skill needed to do it your self. Sure, you still have to figure out and choose how to customize the system to the situation, but that's why there is a human in charge. In a tabletop game it's the Game Master, and in the classroom it's the teacher.

Personally, I find the current mainstream education systems to be much like D&D. You pick a major (class), with the option of changing it, and then you follow the strict rules of encounters, be they classes or combat. With the large focus of D&D rules being on combat, the style of the system influences gameplay in that direction. In school, the grading and recognition systems influence the education experience in the same way. If most of your system focus is on taking the user through a particular set of actions, they will learn to depend on your leadership, or reject it. If the focus is collecting points, they will optimize how they collect points based on their goals.

One of the current big things in games is "sandbox" style gameplay. It has functional rules that define capabilities of objects in the game and the players ability to affect them. The name comes from the behavior of a sandbox that children play in. It becomes their space while they are in charge. If you want to learn more about this direction, I suggest reading this article http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4081/the_history_and_theory_of_sandbox_.php . Such a system is made to encourage creativity and exploration of possibilities.

One of the downfalls in plenty of games is the User Interface, the UI, the tenuous connection between the user and the experience. This is also a sore spot for students and teachers, from what I've observed, when it comes to education. In another article ( http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4110/upping_your_games_usability.php ) it had this at the beginning, "Games that are hard to control or that mystify users by not providing useful or sufficient feedback are pretty damn frustrating to play." The question about when the content of a class will be useful is a request for feedback to deal with being mystified, so it seems relevant, at least to me. On a similar note, there are a lot of design elements that can give clues to what a person should do including, but not limited to, the UI. More about these can be found in this article: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4115/no_more_wrong_turns.php .

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Topplenomics

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:05:00 +0000

The term came to mind after reading some comments on the article linked to below. This is the "why free doesn't work" thing that people hype as well as why businesses and groups of people become unwieldy at high numbers. Simply put, they become top heavy. The few supporting the many overwhelms the few and leaves the many without service.

Article: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/138/who-needs-harvard.html?page=0%2C0

Earlier I was going to watch something on YouTube and stopped because of the slow loading. Why was it slow? Probably because of the number of people accessing it right then. Too much traffic.

This is a classic problem. Something is widely acclaimed and a large number of people want to partake. The problem is that it can kill a business or effort. If many people try to get something from you, but you only have enough for a tenth of them, 90% go away unsatisfied. The unsatisfied remember and tell others. There isn't much reason for them to return till their is proof you can satisfy them.

Yet that's only one possible result. Some pick themselves up, or can handle the flood. However, if they don't maintain a solid base, they can become top heavy. A little mistake and they fall.

So, why am I talking about this? Well, in both education and entertainment this has been a problem. People want to be the top and get all the rewards, but that makes for a bad dynamic. As lot's of people selfishly clamor to the top, there are those who get stuck supporting the greedy. Makes me think of a cartoon where a bunch of characters are climbing over each other till they are floating in the air or just a couple are trying to hold them all up. Then, they all come crashing down.

One merely needs to look at the economic issues to see the truth of topplenomics. People taking from others became successful by scamming and stealing, only to get caught and cause the whole system problems. The economy does best when people are spending and getting paid in a balanced way. It mirrors a guideline I learned in a business class. It's best for a business to be at about 80% capacity. Why, because there is something to fall back on and still plenty to keep going with. Higher means it's time to increase your capabilities, and lower means you should consider what to possibly change.

Personally, I would rather see a bunch of the groups share some of their resources, lower their costs and be able to offer better services for a lower cost to their consumers. This is a big goal of the initiative I mention a fair bit on this blog. Content is normally a one time cost, but services have recurring costs that both fuel and stifle economies. For instance several tutoring services could support a single educational content system. Several indie game development teams could work together to distribute small games through each others sites. If it helps you to send people to potential competitors, it becomes less of a competition and more of a collective effort. The key is to have several to many small groups connected. They can work together for big project and separately for small projects. For instance, selling games could become the business and making games could stay the fun side project. Not only is this idea sustainable, but it also removes business from art, service from content.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

What's Real In Games and Education?

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 05:02:00 +0000

To sum up my answer, it's people, communication and reactions. The rest is a contrivance to facilitate communication with, and getting reactions from, other people. Assessment ( http://edubacon.com/2009/06/15/weekly-special-assesment/ ) is a way to communicate a reaction to another person. Games use communication with other people to generate certain reactions, as does a school environment. They can be used to motivate ( http://edubacon.com/2009/06/08/weekly-special-motivating-learners/ ) , engage people ( http://edubacon.com/2009/06/23/weekly-special-open-engagement/ ), keep people involved ( http://blog.igenoukan.com/2008/11/keeping-people-involved.html ) and many other things. The term Edubacon ( http://edubacon.com/ ) refers to the reality in the synthetic situation we call education.

I know I've been quiet for about a month on my two blogs, and this is a part of the reason why. I'm working on improving the way I run Edubacon and maybe get some more interaction. Based off of the materials I've posted, and posted by others, I'm making an article/post/e-mail to send out to many potentially interested people like teachers. This post is to let you all know I'm still working on this stuff and to give a pre-view of what I'm working on.

During the process of creating what I'll be mass e-mailing, I did some research on the internet. Yes, I know it's a big surprise for a college student and blogger to do internet research, but stay with me for a moment. I wanted to check out search results for the name I'm thinking of using. See, nothing too crazy. In doing so some interesting articles and blog posts came to my attention that I would like to share that go right in line with my efforts.

First is an article about being too focused on the results, and not enough on the process. In essence it say that students are people too, so teachers should treat them like people with real feelings and personalities. In effective communication it's important to remember to listen, actively listen, to the other person. Not paying attention to the feelings and personalities of his students, the professor found that he was driving his students to hard to make sure they got the point right then and there.

Article: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/569446

Second is another article that deals with professors and pushing their students too far, this time to the point of shedding tears. Its big point is to look at a student more like how a parent looks at their children. Rather than looking at all the faults and things that could use correction, that professor thinks teachers should remember the potential of each student. Just because the student has faults, isn't the best, needs a lot of work, is going to fail your class, doesn't mean they are less worthy of your time or less in need of your help.

This article has comments after it, and one of them jumped out at me. 'Although I agree that grades should be based on performance and we should lead them to good work habits, I don't see that I'd teach them anything by kicking them in the teeth while they're down and telling them "that's life, suck it up." How does it diminish us or coddle them to take a few minutes to listen to their stories, sympathize, and give a bit of advice, particularly if they are going to fail the course? Ask them a few questions nicely "Why do you think you are having trouble with the material?" and their answers might lead you to the advice they need (eg. "the counseling center has help for test anxiety" "You might consider switching to another major such as ____"). This is higher education not boot camp.'

Article: http://chronicle.com/article/When-Students-Cry/47540/

Third is an article that covers how a school was handling the real life scheduling problems of their student athletes, and the reaction it received. Their solution was to give the 2% of the students who are student athletes a priority when registering for courses. The article doesn't take a side. but instead shows different sides of the situation. I really like the quote at the end of the article, as it acknowledges the reasoning while saying there may be a better way. It's a common problem with solutions. Just because there is a legitimate reason for the proposed solution doesn't make it automatically the best solution.

Article: http://www.michigandaily.com/content/2008-11-10/student-outrcy-ignited-athlete-priority-registration

Fourth is a blog of a student teacher from a couple years back that I encourage you to read. While it only lasts a semester, it has many interesting insights into the world of a person teaching and learning at the same time. While not always comfortable, the reactions from the students was enough to encourage that teacher to discount the teachers and staff who seemed like discouragement.

One of the students, in an assigned letter to the teacher, said this at the end of the course. "Throughout the semester, it seemed like you didn't want a day to go to waste. You always had us writing, analyzing, or discussing. I really appreciated this because it made me feel as though I was going through the same emotions and experiences of the characters. All the analyzing made them come alive. Your standards took a while getting used to because many of the English teachers I've had in the past went easy on me. I also wasn't used to having so many essays, but your comments were so helpful that I think my writing has improved significantly. You pushed us hard, but I'll be mature enough to say that is was worth it . I really hope that you teach 11th grade English next year or even AP English." To be honest, I wish I could find a way to make contact with that teacher. She sounds like a very interesting and insightful person when it comes to teaching. I'm glad she blogged about her experiences. Now I share them with you.

Blog: http://teachingtochangetheworld.blogspot.com/

The fifth and last of the interesting things I've found in researching the title I'm considering deals with the big question I'll be tackling, "When will I use this in real life?" Its a Q&A site with a question specifically about when algebra is used in real life. While the other things I've mentioned deal with the people, communications and results in a more traditional way, I focus on this question of usefulness as a part of motivating student to care about learning the material. The fact the the question is well known to occur says a lot about how schools teach students in general. That's also why I intend to send the completed article/e-mail with a bunch of links for those interested in finding out more. There are some great answers found to the question that should be shared with teachers to share with their students.

Q&A: http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/52324.html
Q&A: http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/faq.why.math.html

In general, I'm intending to pull from the materials I have easy access to and to find more to use in what I send off. By using a small article with several pointed, dedicated links I'm hoping to get some of the teachers to read more into this. Maybe some will share the links or forward the e-mail. Maybe some people will come and get involved in the discussions about improving education. If you want to share some information with me, I welcome the contribution. This is likely to include the summary posts I've had planned for Edubacon for months, so there will be credits for those people who have contributed to that effort.

Some people might wonder why I care so much and refuse to stop when my ideas don't work. To put it simply, I've dealt with bad teachers that meant well, bad situations beyond my control and still have retained my love of learning. Then there are the results of the current approach to education that is doing horrors to our future. One business teacher I had said that he saw the lack of focus on business ethics in business classes as part of the reason for the economic problems we're going through. Education matters, a lot.

Then there is the way people generally view school, learning and education. A necessary evil is not what should be thought of, though there will be some work involved. It's like sports and video games where there are more and less pleasant parts, but on the whole it should be considered a good thing, not a bad thing. One of the comments on the second article I mentioned that if you get to know your students you should be able to see the problems coming a mile away. While I'm not sure how feasible it is for teachers with a lot of students, or for game designers to implement through code, there is something to be considered in the concept. The more about the person you know, the more real and human they become to you. That information enables you to more easily treat the person like a person rather than a thing.

In line with the Weekly Specials posted on Edubacon, I'll give some more links I've found relating to this material. If you know of other good resources, please pass them on to me. While I may not be blogging much at the moment, I am working on a few projects, including this article/e-mail that I will post in parts and/or the whole.

Links and Descriptions:

http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/teachtip.htm
- It's a wonderful page of links that I intend to explore. It's huge. The few pages I've looked at so far have all had really good content.

http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content2/Student_motivatation.html
- This is a breakdown of motivation beyond what I've done. Very interesting and informative. It should be very useful to most people who have reasons to motivate others.

http://www.nwrel.org/request/oct00/textonly.html
- This is an official booklet on motivating students. While haven't read it yet, the promise of "a discussion of research and literature pertinent to the issue" is enough reason for me to be interested.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Parallel Prototype Iteration

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 01:08:00 +0000

The iterative design process is to analyze, design, test and repeat. Normally the testing process is through prototypes. When I think of prototypes I think of the Experimental Gameplay Project, which had individuals prototype game ideas in one week. I thought it would be interesting to take the successful methods of the Experimental Gameplay Project and put them into each round of iteration.

The basic idea is that rapid prototyping with the parallel splatter model could lead to more thorough testing of design ideas. This is the difference between normal iterative designing and parallel prototype iteration. You want a map system, then have an iterative cycle of map systems on the main prototype. With at least a few to test and analyze, the team should have plenty to analyze and learn from.

While I take this in a game development direction, that's no limitation. Playable can be replaced with functional. This is a general idea for creating better results.

STEPS:
So, now that I've introduced the general idea, I'll get to the step processes and breakdowns.

Analyze:
This is a team activity including diagramming, discussions and determining the next design goals for the group. Not a whole lot to this, besides the facts that it is the only always team step and that it should be kept seperate from the design step. That's to make sure all the results are analyzed and understood by all the team members.

Design:
This step can be either a team, group or individual step, depending on what design goals are to be tackled. Either way, this step decides the ideas that are to be made into prototypes.

Test:
This is the heart of the concept, where the prototypes are made and altered. Yet, the explanation of why will come later.

UNIQUENESS:
Perhaps it doesn't sound sound too impressive right now, but the iterative process and prototyping ideas explain the effectiveness of those part already. No, it's not the process that is so interesting to me so much as the emergent patterns.

Main Prototype:
In rapid prototyping it makes sense to have a main set of build versions as the main prototype. These incorporate the selected code, features, interaction, gameplay and such from the parallel prototyping rounds. This means that each iteration you start with the culmination of the efforts so far, and don't need to redo the whole thing from scratch every time.

Branch Prototypes:
These are all the prototypes that are not a part of the main prototype version history. Some would say these are a waste of time, but these are not just "wasted effort", they are very useful as I tell more about later in this post.

Parallel Prototyping Round:
This is a round of iteration that focuses on designing and prototyping several ideas. That's to generate creative options with the data needed to make informed design decisions.

Updating Round:
Using the selected prototyped ideas from parallel prototyping rounds, the main prototype version is updated. This is much like refining the integration of selected idea(s) into the main prototype.

BENEFITS:
There are several benefits to this method theoretically. They are a combination of those normally found in iterative designing and parallel development.

Version Tree:
In most open source projects I know of there is a branching history of versions. The many branches give fall back options, code and feedback to be incorporated into the project as needed. Sometimes you will find that a major decision needs to be changed. The branches help speed up the process.

Information:
More so than either concept on it's own, this combined idea should give mounds of information. In fact, that's the reason for having the idea as a written up idea. As a formal design approach it should be able to handle the information that comes per prototype success, failure or in-between. Comparative play testing of versions and ideas, development feasibility and more come naturally out of this process.

Something to Show:
Iterative prototyping and rapid parallel prototyping both give results, but this combined method delivers playable prototypes of the ideas that didn't make it in. It encourages keeping each and every individual prototype created during the project. When people want to see what you have done, project progress, why you made a choice or anything else where a playable prototype would be helpful, you have them.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Assessment in Games and Education

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 04:58:00 +0000

As the person behind Edubacon, I figured I should keep my word a post about the topic of the week, assessment. While I made another post for the topic ( http://blog.igenoukan.com/2009/06/designing-for-play-creativity-and.html ), this one is a recap of some related posts of mine.

Happy with Perfection?
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2008/09/happy-with-perfection.html

I see several problems with a 100% mentality to grading. This post covers some of them, and a possible solution or two. Part of the problem is parents, but part of it is that a higher difficulty can lead to lower grades, when there is more learning in the higher difficulty. Homework, testing and grade representation all have their parts in this. Expanding our assessments to include a variety of good qualities can give us a better result.

Iteration and Prototyping
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2008/10/iteration-and-prototyping.html

Perhaps not the first thing to come to mind for assessments, it is relevant. First is that each prototype is different, like a person's skills and approach differ after learning.

Pointless Obstacles are Bad
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2008/10/pointless-obstacles-are-bad.html

This is a little more directly related in that assessments shouldn't be limited by classes. Testing into and out of classes is an example, but not the limit. If a person has taken the course once, why should they be forced to take the course again just to retest on the curriculum. Perhaps this would make colleges and universities seem more like testing and accreditation institutions, but having to pay for the class and redo all of it just to prove capability doesn't make sense except as a business.

Testing Before Teaching, Why?
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2008/12/i-find-following-article-to-be.html

Defending pre-tests really wasn't my initial intent, but it was hard not to in response to a particular article. One example that even the author conceded was testing out of a class, but there is so much more to a well given and used pre-test. It can help teachers and students. One of the big points is it not counting towards the course grade. Are the results important? Yes, but a pre-test that counts for the grade isn't over material covered in the course. It has other uses.

Logical Content Breakdown
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2009/01/logical-content-breakdown.html

This one is about the content of the assessments, and the order. In the example covered in the post, splitting up the content differently and using a slightly altered explanation would make learning the curriculum very different from the current norms, for that topic. To further facilitate that kind of content breakdown and the learning that comes from it, assessments and self-assessments should be given. Yes, I just said that self-assessments should be given. It's a matter of getting students to see their mistakes, shortcomings and weaknesses. The content breakdown can make learning the material easier, but assessments can help learners see how well they have learned the different parts.

Metalearning: Learning How You Learn
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2009/04/metalearning-learning-how-you-learn.html

The big idea is that it's good to know how you learn, and so it is good to learn how you learn. To do that requires assessing the results of learning attempts, and comparing them; assessing how well and learning method works for you. Trial and error is the default method for this. Helping students understand themselves as a learner has many possible positive effects. One is giving students the knowledge to craft good learning environments and select good learning resources for themselves. If you don't know how you learn, experimenting while being graded can seem like a very bad idea.

Skill Based Grading
http://blog.igenoukan.com/2009/04/skill-based-grading.html

I'm a game designer, and this is one of the points I like in gameplay when there is to be improvement; skill based assessment. With skill based gameplay, difficulty is matched with skill levels to provide a suitable difficulty. Well, what if the debriefing of results and skill based results found in some games was used in assessment? I think it would be interesting to have achievements, multiple measurements and the ability to retry after learning from previous mistakes.

Automated Tests

No, I didn't miss a link. This isn't a post I've made before, but rather a record of my thoughts after going through those posts. I think one of the keys to improving assessments is to make them less costly to give and take. Automated tests are a possible solution, if done well. Randomly generated problems will always be able to be solved by the right software, but they can be used as non-graded self-assessments and graded assessments when other tools are not available.

I know that many proponents of improving education are for opening up the resources normally available to students, but the keys to automated tests are providing the resources and not allowing alternative resources. Basically it becomes a game. How well you do at the game shows what you can do, but if you have a tool that solves the problems for you, it's pointless to use. Yet it is also not logical to test a person in a way that removes information that would be available to them in the real deal merely because they don't remember it. So, if the assessment was on derivative calculus as a whole, it might start with picking the correct names of the rules, putting the equations together correctly, using them in problems and correctly identifying the abnormal cases. It would probably take a while, but everything needed is there and requires the learned skills and knowledge to succeed. I think most people would enjoy assessments more if it was less like being put on trial and more like exploratory play. Isn't education supposed to be a safe time to make mistakes before going out into the real world?

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Designing for Play, Creativity and Motivation

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 05:56:00 +0000

This week at Edubacon the theme, Weekly Special, is motivating learners. As a game designer and sole writer at my blog, Learning Science Meets Game Design, I'll be taking a look at this from the point of view of designing motivation into a user experience, which is as applicable to motivating learners as players. There are also good points for making a work environment with playfulness.

I look at how motivation is handled and I don't like it. When such views are brought up, it's common to hear that something being good for you should be enough, and I agree that it should. However, that doesn't mean it is. See, there's a problem with one good point, even a really good one, trying to outweigh a lot of bad points. Unless it is a stellar good point, the person isn't likely to think the action(s) is/are worth the effort.

Each of the following TED talks shows a part of the picture. I'll highlight the parts I think are most relevant after each. There are also a few web pages that I think are relevant, with commentary on each of those. So, let's get the show on the road.

NOTE: There's about eighty minuets of video in this post. If you don't have that kind of time, you might want to be selective of which ones you watch.

Sir Ken Robinson
Current style stifles play and creativity.

http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

Most of the current systems of education, training and instruction say there is a single right way. (I'm guessing this comes, in part, from education and religions interacting over the centuries.) That way is to be memorized and repeatable. That's pretty much it.

If you make a mistake, you are punished. This makes it so mistakes become taboo. Mistakes, things that could potentially cause pain, things that could potentially limit profits, actions without guaranteed positive results etc. are taboo and limit exploration of possibilities, innovation and creativity.

Recently this idea has come up in a Copyright Summit. The blog post about this occurrence was also picked up by Stephen Downes via OLDaily. Take a look to see what Stephen Downes says about this and also the post itself. It gives me hope just reading it.
http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/page.cgi?post=49235
http://copyrightandtechnology.com/2009/06/09/gridlock-at-the-world-copyright-summit/

Tim Brown
Linking play and creativity.

http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_brown_on_creativity_and_play.html

Having reminders of the intended playful atmosphere is a very good thing to have. Silly activities and symbols of play remind each person that while there is some seriousness to what's going on that there should be play and creativity too. With the fear of failure out of the way, more creativity can shine. In essence it is supporting the people to be free and playful, rather than just having the option.

Stuart Brown
More on the importance of play.

http://www.ted.com/talks/stuart_brown_says_play_is_more_than_fun_it_s_vital.html

More about play, but it focuses on the importance of play on being a balanced person and how it changes interactions. I know that personally I prefer to be around people who are willing to laugh at themselves and things they find funny. It's a way of being emotionally open to the world. This and the previous video are wonderful for sharing play as a concept. Simply put, it' important for your mental, emotional and physical well being to play, at least in some way, preferably many ways.

JJ. Abrams
This is playful, exploratory learning.

http://www.ted.com/talks/j_j_abrams_mystery_box.html

Not only is it important to deal with the fun and reminders of play, but also things like mystery. When should information be withheld to improve the method? What information should be withheld? Sharing everything at once would just cause a problem, covered in another TED talk called the Paradox of Choice (http://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html). The idea is that sometimes it is better to hold back the information, rather than giving all the options and information. Reaching the happy balance of participating to a significantly beneficial level without being overwhelmed is perhaps not easy to design, but we should strive to reach it for ourselves and others.

Dave Egger
There are ways for everybody to help.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dave_eggers_makes_his_ted_prize_wish_once_upon_a_school.html

I'd say this is the big one for showing how it can work. There is play and work, assessment and amusement. The other big thing is that participating is the important part on both the student's part as well as the tutors. Both sides need to participate, like in play where both sides submit to the rules of engagement. Everybody who "applies themselves" gets more out of it, because they are willing to play. It doesn't take much to help, but that little bit can mean a lot to those you help. It's also important to noticed the cooperation between those being helped and those giving the help. Just because you are helping doesn't mean you're the best choice to determine what should be done.

Influencing Others

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/1573/becoming_a_stellar_games_industry_.php

While I do like this article, it seems a little aggressive in it's approach to what should be done with influence. "In a perfect world, you would be able to influence everyone around you – your team, your developer (or publisher), and management – to do things exactly your way." I think that the truth is in a perfect world everybody would agree to implement the best answer, but since we don't live in a perfect world we should try to help people, including ourselves, to explore different points of view to help determine the best answer. That, and we should all remember that the answer we choose isn't likely to be the absolute best answer, but it doesn't have to be.

Avoiding Meltdown

http://bbrathwaite.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/team-meltdown/

This blog post shows ways to avoid a team meltdown. The title says as much, but it's a good place to start. Preventing a meltdown is important to creating a playful environment.

Building Environments

http://www.thejonjones.com/2009/02/08/speccing-out-contracts-smartly-aka-automatically-building-awesome-teams/

This post is about preventing problems and making the way you do things create a positive work environment. I like it, and think it fits well.

All in all I really haven't said much in this post, but rather have strung together several pieces of the internet together to form probably a two hour presentation's worth of content that could be made into a multi-day event. I guess for once in my life I am being concise. It all works together to help motivate the people providing the service and those receiving the service.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

The Mystery of Motivation in Games

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 07:13:00 +0000

It has been noticed for a long time that people seem to be more motivated when playing games than in school. This motivation has been left as inherent to games, but the efforts to create educational games has for the most part shown that this is not true, maybe. I think the motivation is outside the game entirely, but that the game design principles for user experience design should be helpful in encouraging motivation in learners.

For the last week I have been participating in the Serious Games Jam and it came about that I posted about motivation and approach. This setting contributed to the efforts, but did not generate the motivation to figure this out. Rather it gave context, which was a serious buzz word during the Jam. That perhaps pushed me as something not quite right, but that's still doesn't explain the motivation.

No, the motivation was outside the entire situation and a part of the picture that I brought. It wasn't due to the context of the jam or the "game" of earning "Karma" points to win a Nintendo DS. There was something inside me that motivated me to try to find answers related to serious games, that motivated me to participate in the Jam, that motivated me to push through the hardships and get to the good parts, the rewards, but the rewards didn't generate motivation. I'd stopped expecting to "win" the "game" early on. So, what was it?

How I Figured it Out:

Due to a tweet from Jim Groom, if I remember correctly, I came across a parody article. That's where it started.

Parody: http://bionicteaching.com/?p=997

Real Article: http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/article/3797/students-prefer-real-classroom-to-virtual-world

The real article was also mentioned in OLDaily, by Stephen Downes.

OLDaily Edition: http://www.downes.ca/archive/09/06_02_news_OLDaily.htm

Specifically: http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/page.cgi?post=49149

While I thought it was interesting, nothing triggered at first, but in the post by Stephen Downes there is mention of the comments made on the article, so I started reading them. In there, somewhere, the ideas started smashing together like atoms in a giant atom smasher giving me a glimpse of smaller parts. That's where I found the motivation from outside video games that educators have been looking to add to their curriculum.

From my SGJ forum post:
"What came to mind is that motivation, approach and goals all need to coincide for the learning to really happen well. In the normal school environment grades are the goal, not learning. When you have people together who want to learn, and have a decent way to learn, the learning is likely to happen. Why?

Students are told what they should and shouldn't do all the time it seems. Truth is most of us are taught from a young age to follow orders without thinking about them. In that case you are being told not to care about the the how or even the what. So, the question becomes, why should they care about learning? The answer heard most of the time boils down to, "I said so." That's not the kind of motivation found in games.

In a game you expect to fail sometimes. That failure gives you feedback that you can use to improve, in good games. Most of the time that feedback is in the form of watching what happens as it happens. Then you use the scientific method to improve. Hypothesis, testing, analysis and repeat as needed. That's an engaged approach that is looked for in education, however it isn't the games themselves that generate the motivation and approach.

Through experiences we see potential, we create dreams/goals and then we hope to reach them. The more effective the action is perceived to be in reaching the dreams/goals, the more hope the person has that it will work. That hope motivates the person to go through the hardships to reach their dreams and goals.

So, first a person needs the experiences that open up the potentials of their life to the person. That gives them things to dream about doing and becoming. Goals are born of the dreams and hope is born of the perceived possibility to reach those goals and dreams."

There's the motivation, "hope motivates the person to go through the hardships to reach their dreams and goals". Give a person hope to attain their dreams and aspirations and suddenly their willing to go through hardship to get there.

In another thread there was a discussion about what serious games are, since people didn't seem to be agreeing. Before a certain video was shared with the group the defining point of a serious game was intent, after it was shared the defining point was agreed to be serious application. In essence, any game that could be used in a serious application became a serious game in that application.

The Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN0qRKjfX3s

Suddenly there were two elements that the group decided were at play, the game and the context. However, both had been in use for a while now, not very well most of the time, but they are used. They didn't answer the big questions for me.

Here's what I wrote in response to the pre-video discussion about the intent being the deciding factor.

"I believe the serious vs entertainment comparison is counterproductive. A serious game can be an entertainment game as well as a an entertainment game can be a serious game. It's like saying something is either tall or wide. First, it depends on the direction you turn it. Second it depends on comparison and scale. To be honest, I don't like the term "serious game" because it doesn't easily map to the real meaning, a game with a serious application. Any game that can be used for a serious application is a serious game in that application to me.

Fact is that game design is user experience design and communication, and that means all you are able to do is give the opportunity. It's the user's way of using what you designed that determines how serious the game is to me."

Games are activities, mental or physical, with rules and goals where the player takes on a role in an agreed upon fictional setting and state of play. Within that setting the person may be a paddle, a fighter, hero, villain, monster or anything else, including themselves. That's the identity they take on, the role they play, in that pretend scenario.

Earlier this year I countered Stephen Downes on the topic of Educational Games. In it I mentioned a video of James Gee, but I would like to add to that two more videos I've come across. The first is "The Urgency of Open Education" by Brian Lamb. The second is Dave Egger's TED talk "Once Upon a School".

See, when you go through those videos you can see the motivational hope to reach goals through participation. Games are by their nature interactive with goals to be attained with a possible promise of being entertained, engaged or something else. The player is immersed into an environment designed to teach the player how to succeed in the game, to make it more enjoyable to play. They have to teach well to prevent the player from deciding not to play, due to frustration.

The games and context require something from the player to really work, participation, as I noted in the forum discussions. "Context influences the perception of the game experience the user has, but does not determine it. Those using games for serious applications should design the context to support the serious application. The rest is up the the user's motivation and approach. While I agree the context is important, I say that because it is part of the game experience, just like elements of the game. If somebody isn't open to the serious application of the game, that's pretty much it."

So, where is the root motivation, the approach? Well, that's where I come back to the original forum post I made about Motivation and approach, "From that logic I see a need to help people see potential and that it IS possible to attain." We need to encourage people to dream and show them that it is possible to make those dreams come true. If they don't have dreams or goals, why would they care enough to put out effort? If they have dreams and goals that are very basic, why would they work really hard to excel? If they have dreams and goals that they don't believe can become their reality, why would they really apply themselves?

Be real. Go big, or go home. Live your dream. When there is no fantasy in the mind there is no fantasy in the life. My life is like a cartoon show because I live it like that. Nature, dreams, friends, games, fun, wonder, learning, improving ... When people tell me that what I'm about to do is impossible, I respond with, "Just watch." That's because if I do it while they are watching, they can see that it IS possible. Since I didn't tell myself it was impossible, I stood a chance of doing it if it is possible. I dream and live, because I want to DO.

Imagination and dreams are what propel us into the unknown waiting for us to reach for it. At this point I ask you to watch another TED talk, because it sums up several cultural issues to be faced to motivate people to learn.

http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

We need to stop limiting the creativity of others with our fears. Parents can't protect their children from everything, nor should they. I mean that very seriously, and not just for parents. As a toddler I bit my Mother, once. I only did it once because she thought it was a Texan giant bug of some sort and tried to smack it full force. Since there was no bug there, I was smacked instead. Pain is just pain, not damage. Failure isn't the problem, it's the results that can come from failure. Because she smacked me, I learned and didn't bite as a child, at all.

When we are wiling to take a little pain here and there with some failures along the way, we become open to exploring ideas, like when we play. When playing, which is the state that games are supposed to induce, we do not mind a little pain, boredom, failure and we let go of the tight laced straitjacket of conformist tradition. Why, because it's play, not serious. This is where the term "serious games" goes completely wrong. It still needs to be play, meaningful learning play. Yes, that's another TED talk. Watch it and you'll understand why it's there and what I meant just now.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/stuart_brown_says_play_is_more_than_fun_it_s_vital.html

A play, is where people present role playing of a scene to the audience, and we call it art. It's not just art, it's make believe, pretend. It is encouraging people to think beyond their current lives and consider other possibilities that exist, showing them things that can be done. It's also entertainment.

This all comes together with an understanding of learning that says experience and knowledge together, not apart, enable learning. Work done to learn is a part of play. Play is a part of the motivation for doing some things, but even that does have a motivation sequence that matches what I have described. Seeing the enjoyment of those playing, one is likely to long to share such experiences. That's the exposure through experience creating dreams and goals. Since it is easy to participate and reach the goal, there is the hope to motivate the person to play.

This play motivation is the basis to really getting people motivated to do anything. If people refuse to play, it's nearly impossible to motivate them to do anything, because they have to at least be willing to entertain, play with, a thought to be motivated concerning that thought. People who open mindedly use logic play with it.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Creatively Getting Things Done

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 00:35:00 +0000

Regardless of the field, creative designing, and getting those paying jobs, requires a few things.

1) Keep coming up with ideas.
2) Record those ideas.
3) Find one you can do quickly an easily.
4) Do that one, just that one.
5) Have a real life.

While this isn't an exact set of rules, they are pretty good. This is because over time you will get some ideas that are possible with potential. If you can get a few made, you have work samples. That's what the fourth step is all about. Pick one, do it and do it well.

Number 1: Keep coming up with ideas.

If you are trying to be known for creativity, don't just be creative on command. Be creative all the time. Having a bunch of half formed ideas can be a life saver, inspiration or an extra bit of content for the on-command idea.

Yet, the big reason is that even for those who can be creative on command, being creative all the time helps. For those fortunate people, the quality of ideas will be better if you are already warmed up and well experienced. For the rest of us it is easier to just be creative most of the time than to be creative on command. Then you are just doing your normal level of creativity.

It also prevents the dreaded scenario of loosing your creativity due to being boring. Sometimes it is harder to be creative after a while having not been creative. If you are always being creative, you're not likely to go for a while without being creative. Yes, it's obvious, but some things just need to be reiterated.

Number 2: Record those ideas.

While it may be a pain to keep track of all those ideas, and worse yet to keep them organized on all those different kinds of paper, it's better than loosing them. That and when you need and idea, you have a bunch to go reading through. It helps.

Number 3: Find one you can do quickly an easily.

With all those ideas flowing and being recorded, you should look for an easy to do idea. Just keep going till you find one. It's important.

Number 4: Do that one, just that one.

See, that one idea is important, because you need something you can actually DO! With such ideas done one at a time, you can build a history, a portfolio, a resume etc... As you go through the ideas you've recorded you can find more. Plus, over time more will become possible and easy. More ideas and increased abilities means you will have more possible ideas you can do.

Number 5: Have a real life.

Look, you can't just be a creative [fill in the blank]. It doesn't work. It's like pouring water out of a jug, not a faucet. There's a limit to what you can do without input. During the time where you're looking for anything you can actually do, you were doing other things. They gave you input.

Read, play, socialize and live life, or you will run out of material.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/elizabeth_gilbert_on_genius.html

Related Links:
http://www.chrisg.com/just-like-breathing/
http://www.dperry.com/archives/news/dp_blog/the_pirate_bay/
http://www.terrystarbucker.com/2009/05/11/it%E2%80%99s-like-breathing/
http://www.gameproducer.net/2009/05/12/game-production-lessons-from-a-half-marathon-trip/
http://www.gameproducer.net/2009/05/09/the-easiest-kind-of-way-to-prioritize-big-things/
http://www.gameproducer.net/2009/05/06/some-things-dead-wake-development-has-taught-me/
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20051026/gabler_01.shtml

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Efficient and Effective Everyday

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 02:20:00 +0000

In my post Keeping People Involved I made a point about sweating the small things, because that's what people do day-to-day. "When figuring out things to do for a community, think about the daily activities and supplying things to do to keep people involved and having fun." That also goes for teams, groups and individuals. Make the day-to-day a priority in designing how you work, it'll pay off in the long run.

Could I go on for a while about this? Yes, but I won't. The whole idea of the "Getting Things Done" theme is that you learn about ways to make yourself and your group more likely to get things done. It's not about me telling you how to do it. Take a look at these different ways and think about how they could be applied to how you work.

Virtuous Circle:
http://blog.broadbandmechanics.com/2009/05/29/5697/

Open Space:
http://www.openspaceworld.com/brief_history.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barcamp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coworking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_desking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowdsourcing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrum_(development)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_Programming

Sorry about the delay, but the next couple post are already partially done. So, here they come.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

EduBacon Starting Up

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Tue, 26 May 2009 04:12:00 +0000

So, I've been posting about the blog event, but until now there's been little to show for it until now. Sure, there's plenty of work to do, but this thing is starting. With the Serious Games Jam happening next week, I have a pre-event for two weeks on getting things done that will be happening. That should be plenty useful in and of itself, but then there is the blogging/discussion event to come. Even self promotion can be helpful to this kind of event, so long as you have good relevant content.

Basically, I don't want to detract or compete with the Serious Games Jam. It's a great set of discussions on it's own. No point in holding my event at the same time. However there are plenty of reasons to put together a bunch of resources on getting things done before and during the event. If nothing else it is useful to those who are likely to participate in the Serious Games Jam.

So, here's the general plan. I'm going to be making posts on getting things done that have a bunch of relevant links in them. If you have some great, or even okay, links to such materials, please share them. Contributions will be noted. After that, the blogging event will get going.

Yet that's not the whole of this. While I'm posting useful content like that, you can do several things to get into the action. You can add your thoughts and comments to the mix of ideas. You can share the word about the blogging event. You can share great resources so others can use them. We're all in this together.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Masters and Meditation

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Fri, 22 May 2009 03:50:00 +0000

Normally people think of meditation as merely the clearing of one's mind, because those that teach it don't explain why to do it or what it leads to. Reminds me of the question about school subjects, "When am I going to use it in real life?"

Basic Mastery

This is the stage one reaches where they have learned and understand the craft/subject from it's point of view. This is what a lot of people think it means to be a master and expect the results of being a full master.

Intermediate Mastery

This is the stage where the person has gained a broader understanding from many points of view. These people are sometimes slower to answer a question, but they have a higher accuracy rate than the basic master, and they are also more flexible in their application of skills.

Full Mastery

This is when the speed comes back through experience and familiarity while also increasing the scope and flexibility. These are the "grand" masters people recognize as learning from all of life to improve their skills and understanding and then apply their increased mastery to the rest of life.

Meditation Mastery

First you learn to clear your mind during a dedicated time. This is a single application of self-control. To clear your mind you put worries, feelings and impulses in their proper place, that is under your control rather than in control. Most people have trouble doing this during quiet, still meditation. Even with moving meditation and other forms, many still struggle with this.

Second, you learn to clear your mind during other activities. Moving meditation uses a particular activity to help reach the calm state. The difference is scope. Moving meditation uses the one activity while this advanced form is to reach a meditative state, clear minded, during any and all activities. It becomes easier as you accomplish it with more activities. That is because you are able to compare becoming clear minded with different things to focus on.

Third, after identifying the meditative state, you try to maintain it. Being calm, open to possibilities and effective at all times is the goal. It's not that your mind is always without thought, it's that you can clear the useless and hindering thoughts from your mind when needed. This is generically useful and known as focus.

Today's Lesson:
There are different levels of mastery.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Jeet Kune Do for the Polymath: Life Long Learning

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Tue, 19 May 2009 05:47:00 +0000

As I've been pushing this thing now called EduBacon, I've been researching Bruce Lee and Jeet Kune Do. It's an interesting approach to martial arts that can be applied to teaching and learning of all sorts. This is very much my own personal style to learning, though I have absolutely no training in such a style. It is to study, learn, improve, refine, be honest, be aware and be flexible.

Polymath

Wikipedia Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymath

A polymath is a person who has gone past the Jack of all trades. Rather than being a jack of all trades and master of none, they are a jack of all trades and master of some. People like , Einstien, Leanardo da Vinci and Archimedes were all polymaths, especially Da Vinci. Like the knights of the high middle ages and the romanticized versions, learning about social, martial, artistic, philosophic and scientific topics is expected.

Jeet Kune Do

The name translates to "Way of the Intercepting Fist".
Wikipeia Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeet_Kune_Do

Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do Documentary
1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4CVTq44icg
2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDCyGHmGP2k
3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lArIcs92rA
4) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGkgQuYtqtk
5) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07OurW8xllg
6) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeEf6O3dsXA
7) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itK_D7HxkLI
8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dg1VlaETzC0
9) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWrxFEEiB9k

This isn't a passive or aggressive approach, but rather an assertive approach. You move and flow with the events as they happen and when opportunity comes you flow into the opening. This is why the strike would be said to just happen instead of being done. You stay in a functional state of mind so that you are unhindered to express yourself through those things you have learned.

It is also a process of self improvement based on your current state. Absorbing those things which are useful to you increases your effectiveness. Rejecting those things which are useless makes you more efficient. Learn what you can from using that which is useful and grow. This is how you add your own touch to it. As you improve, what is useful and useless will change, thus you should not write something off because of it's current uselessness to you. Remember it, but do not be limited by it.

Wider Application

By taking the Jeet Kune Do approach and using it in a wider scope you can become a more well rounded individual. Whether or not the teacher helps you use this method, you can. When learning, they are not the important part, because they are merely the help for you to grow and learn. "Be real." Think AND do.

"It's not how much you have learned but how much you have absorbed in what you have learned."

"Man, he is constantly growing and when he is bound by a set of pattern of ideas or way of doing things, that's when he stops growing." Bruce Lee

I don't understand these concepts as something taught to me, but as something inherent to my way of life. I work on my body to work on my mind. I work on my mind to work on my understanding of life. I work on my understanding of life to work on my body. By starting in one area a person can learn about it in a narrow way. Having "mastered" it, they can apply that to other things they learn in a broad way. Then they can use the other things they have learned to gain a broader understanding of the first.

Learning Science Meets Game Design

"A few simple techniques well presented, an aim clearly seen, are better than a tangled maze of data whirling in disorganized educational chaos." Bruce Lee

This quote sums up so much of good game design and teaching. You give enough to learn without overwhelming. You make sure to properly share the concepts, ideas, with others. This gives the opportunity for the students/players to grow and learn through doing. This is where the knowledge gained through study meets the knowledge gained through experience. Those give the driven individual the ability to grow.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Misery By Choice

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sun, 17 May 2009 06:09:00 +0000

I like to look into the interesting connection and results of how people think about and approach life. Something that just occurred to me is a cycle that goes from choice to misery. It's understood by many that bad news gets better ratings. The choice to look for bad news means good news is ignored. After a while the bad news is primarily what is seen rather than the good news. Mostly bad news leads to a lack of hope and misery as all around people see the bad and not the good.

There are many little choices we make without thinking about the long range effects. Usually this is due to the immediate situation and sensations. This is but one example. Perhaps if this gets a decent response I'll post about others I notice.

Stimulation Addiction

This is the reason people prefer bad news, it gives them some sort of pleasent stimulation. The reasons vary, but the point is that the motivation is getting stimulation. In some way it makes the person feel better.

Reward Reaction

Like an animal being trained, the person who keeps coming back to the bad news keeps getting their reward. They look for the bad news because it gives them the reward they may not even know they are seeking. This behavior culminates in surrounding one's self with nothing but bad news.

Bad News Blues

The bad news is seen, heard and reiterated till the good is forgotten and ignored. With little to no good in a person's view of reality, hopelessness, despair and misery ensue.

Metaphor Meaning

In a way this is like a drug. Some people dabble with minor effects while others drown in their addiction(s). If the person doesn't want to get out of their lifestyle, there isn't a lot of hope. They have to see and understand the benefit and choose another way of life.

Parallel Application

A student who doesn't want to learn will not learn, and a player who doesn't want to live the experience won't. Truth is that these things are optional growth and the person must in some way "opt in". Games work by the principle of opting in, one of the keys to opening the doors of the mind, that can lead to motivation.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Opt In Effort Design

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sun, 17 May 2009 06:06:00 +0000

If a person holds self back, they will not fully experience a situation. This is where the adage "You get out of it what you put into it." When living by fear you hold back on the chance that the experience is bad and so you don't want to fully experience it. However this means you will get little benefit out of anything.

Whether I am designing a game or learning situation I still count it as user experience design, and so it seems logical to design an opt in part.

What's This About?

It's not about the possible misuse.
It's not about the actions or results.

It's about practice and experience.
It's about learning and growth.

If you want people to do, then you should train them by having them do. There is plenty of things that are done in schools, but the real world doing is reserved for those who have proved themselves in some way. This doesn't make sense as a general teaching approach. You don't learn while memorizing. They are two totally different actions.

Where's the fun?

Depends on the fun you are talking about, but I think fun generally comes from DOing something. Maybe that's just me. By taking on new identities and not just memorizing what other people have done you can have a more full learning experience, but it takes more than a little opt in to get there.

Learning and understanding require knowledge and dedication of self. Many things are not fun without a decent amount of personal dedication, and the knowledge needed to DO.

It's like stepping up to the plate. Sure, you swing and miss only to swing and miss again, but then comes the time where after trying and observing you learn and understand. Stepping up to the plate you pick up the bat with confidense and determination. The results don't matter, because the effort is all that's on your mind. Without reservation you swing the bat. Even missing the first two times means nothing, except that you will have to swing a third time. This is the time where trying and testing really count, because it has meaning to you. If you miss the third time, it would be disappointing, but to hit the ball out of the park is the point.

Who's helping out?

Those charged with helping people learn need to look for those stepping up to the plate and use their feedback appropriately. Positive and negative feedback can be used to not only help people reach this point, but also to make the most of these times.

Sure, it's not easy, but it's worth the effort. Getting to know all those students and learning about each of them enough to build a quality relationship. Then cultivating their creativity, showing that they matter and getting them to continue to try all take effort. Sometimes though, it's as easy as stepping out of the way and watching the student shine. Knowing when to give an opportunity, to push them harder and/or step out of the way is as much a part of this as helping students get to that point. In fact it may be more important as being able to identify success makes it easier to see what contributes to it.

Where to now?

A classic saying that encapsulates the reasons for opt-in design is, "Fake it till you make it." Another is, "Practice makes perfect." The first is geared more towards the motivation side of things and the second is more inline with results.

One of the pieces of advice I've heard several times about getting a job is to already being doing the work. The motivation for learning is usually to accomplish some goal. Trying, failing, improving and trying again shows the improvement, or lack there-of. This gives a way to judge training effectiveness. Think about the two phrases and how experience mixes with knowledge to become learning.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Are Games REALLY the Problem?

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Sun, 03 May 2009 01:30:00 +0000

I've never liked the view that media is the problem. That's not to say that there aren't problems with the media that's made, but rather that it's not the REAL problem that needs to be dealt with.

'As Sid puts it, “the player shouldn’t have to read the same books the designer has read in order to be able to play.”' - http://www.designer-notes.com/?p=119

This got me thinking along the lines of two previous posts. One is about improving the user to improve the system (Oops, I have to finish this one.) and the other is about what real serious game design. It seems to me that the problem might be a combination of people only wanting to play, as in the truly not being open to learning more or expending time and effort to improve, and that people expect the systems to make it so there are no consequences to the former.

Design Challenges

While reading a section of the post ( http://www.designer-notes.com/?p=119 ) called "One Good Game is Better than Two Great Ones" I found myself disagreeing with the tone, till I read the second half of the section. In the first half it talks about having two main concepts fighting for the top place in the design. The second half talks about mixing them to the benefit, rather than detriment, of the gameplay.

Seemed like designers saying we have to make the games simple to do it well, even though that isn't really what's meant in the post. I have seen this view before. First, this is due to marketing and business, not game design. Second, it's a matter of skill and creativity to get big ideas to properly coexist. Third, smaller games are easier to finish and produce. So, I do understand where some people are coming from. It's just not my preference most of the time. As stated in the post, "sometimes multiple games can co-exist in harmony with each other." ( http://www.designer-notes.com/?p=119 )

See, I find it insulting to be told as a gamer and designer that game should be simpler. As a gamer I expect to be pushed in games. Even something as nice and friendly as a farming game has consequences. Treating your animals and crops badly means you will get a small return. So, you are pushed to improve your farming and ranching skills and performance to get better results. I want to create such games that push the players. In the example game from the section, intense action and "an involved mystery-type plot" are put into one game. The action and clues didn't work well together in that game apparently. During the action the players seemed to have forgotten the clues and mystery.

This is the kind of thing I consider a design challenge. While it is true that you can settle for doing as mentioned in the post and tone down the action, there are other solutions.

Possible Solutions

Integrate them on a more granular level. How about having the mystery be a part of the action and the action be a part of the mystery? Where should you try to go during the action? What are the implications of the clue you just found or didn't find where it should have been? Where were the most guards? Why were they there? Could the opposing side have been misleading you? These are possible questions to present to the player to make the two play types work together. Mystery can heighten the action, and the action can provide clues to the mystery.

Make skill growth a major part of the gameplay. Perhaps you start off as a low ranking officer or agent. As you do better in the missions you get promotions. Higher ranked individuals get harder missions and access to more resources. By putting in clues and patterns into the mission generator. Maybe the mystery is optional, or even one of several. This goes into the realm of emergent stories and gameplay, but that could be a good thing.

Interesting Results

Both solutions suggested have educational results, based on assisted learning more than educating. Lots of people don't like to think. As odd a concept as that is for me, I've found it to be violently true. Feelings of security, pleasure and other preferred sensations usually take priority over things like logic, needs and reality.

The granular integration idea helps by blurring the lines. Rather than switching back and forth between thinking and doing, you switch which one is leading and which one is guiding. In the action sequences you are guided by the mystery and clues in your action choices. When the action is over, it takes a guiding role to the mystery solving. By guiding I mean advising. Which direction you go in the action sequences depends on the clues and mystery stuff. Maybe it's better to chase down the henchman, or perhaps the files and data is more important. What happens in the action is important to solving the mystery.

The job promotion and skill based growth idea goes a different direction. Instead of blurring the lines, it makes putting the pieces of the mystery together a part of determining the action. As you do better at remembering the mystery stuff despite the action, you get tools and resources that help you solve the mystery. In other words, it's a positive feedback loop. The fact that the player has trouble with keeping the mystery in mind fits the idea of being a new officer or agent. Meeting the challenge is as much a part of the gameplay as the intense action and involved mystery.

Obvious Fix

If people are having trouble remembering something, you could just remind them. Clue notebooks, communications, meetings and other options are available depending on the setting and plot. While this could mean the other ideas aren't needed, I waited to mention this know because I wanted to prove a point. There are ways to make an idea better without degrading the content. Even if the big solutions aren't available, there are usually simpler options to choose.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

This is Serious Game Design!

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Fri, 01 May 2009 06:07:00 +0000

Take it how you like; high quality game design or designing what's known as serious games. The truth is that it's both. I'll admit to being blinded by the math and science game designs that have come far more easily to mind than this kind of game design, but I know when I find quality work. It makes me want to design. Take a look for yourself at this blog post about Brenda's deep game design. That's something that doesn't just educate, it helps you learn and understand.

These are the kinds of things I look for as an artist. Yes, this is being written as an artist, not an educator, designer or anything else. Just reading about her designs and their results brings back the itch to create. I listen to the group Celtic Woman and I want to play music, sing songs and write poetry. It brings back the desire to learn, grow, push myself and most of all to create something worth the effort of creating and consuming repeatedly.

There is an art to game design and teaching that is easily lost even to the masters if they're not careful. Facts are not enough. Even video isn't enough. Let people live the history, the wonder. Yes there are topics like math and science that seem fairly cut and dry, but why not link that knowledge and those skills into the social and historical situations?

The inspiration for Brenda's design direction was teacher her daughter about the slave trade. The numbers from the school lessons distanced the tragedy from the here and now. "So she did what any game designer worth her salt would do: She made a game out of it." - http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/conferences/tgc_2009/6021-TGC-2009-How-a-Board-Game-Can-Make-You-Cry

'Brathwaite assembled a collection of tiny wooden figures, then had her daughter group them into "families." After her daughter was finished, she picked them up by the handful and placed them on a makeshift boat. Her daughter was confused: Why would she take the parents but leave the baby? Why wouldn't brothers stay with their sisters? "No one wants to go," Brathwaite explained. That's when it started to click.

Then Brathwaite devised a primitive resource management mechanic. It took 10 turns for the boat to cross the Atlantic. The boat had 30 units of food. Each turn, the player had to roll a d6, and reduce their food stores by that number. By the trip's halfway point, it was clear to her daughter that her "cargo" wouldn't make it. It wasn't a "fun" game by any means, but it served a different purpose: It helped her daughter intuitively understand the emotional experience of the slave trade, a lesson that numbers on a chalkboard couldn't provide.

At that point, Brathwaite was hooked.' - http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/conferences/tgc_2009/6021-TGC-2009-How-a-Board-Game-Can-Make-You-Cry

For years I've heard people saying why video games are so bad for society. I'll grant that constantly repeating violent behaviors in a way that encourages mindless slaughter is going to desensitize people. After all, look at the news and television. Their content keeps getting worse and worse, like the video games that are following suit, but that's not all video games.

Sometimes we need to be shown atrocities. We need to know they exist. When good becomes commonplace without bad, good looses its meaning. If you don't know its bad, you aren't likely to fix it. If we aren't shown the humanity of those around us, their needs, desires, faults and contributions, it becomes easy to dehumanize them in our minds. Just because somebody is different doesn't mean you are better than they are or that they are a lower form of life.

We also need to be shown hope. How about a follow-up game for the slave trade that covers the Underground Railroad? National Geographic has tried their hands at an Underground Railroad interactive experience. There is a path that leads out of such pits of despair, but usually you have to dig it yourself. That's the truth we need to share, and the fact that it can be done by those with little or nothing to start with except dedication. How about a Sims game that deals with raising public awareness of problems and community organizing?

With a couple simple mechanics Brenda brought the history to life for her daughter, and it's possible to duplicate it. One of the most repeated questions about school topics is when that knowledge will be useful in life, so why not use interactive models to shown them. In military campaigns there are a lot of logistics to be dealt with. I've seriously heard of people having trouble counting change while running a cash register. Make the problem real and interactive. Don't just tell students how it might be useful, show them.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Blogging Carnival

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Fri, 01 May 2009 05:19:00 +0000

Looking into the phrase that is the title of this post I learned something. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blog_carnival ) It comes pretty close to what I want to do in concept. Yet, there is more to my concept that I'd like to share beyond just what it is. Here's some of the reasons to do it.

Small Projects

This is small project, a concept test and prototype of things to come. Jim Groom and I have been discussing some ideas and this is the first attempt towards those ideas. So, involvement and feedback are important to this event for the sake of improving the concepts, but that's not all.

As a small project, this has several advantages. It is low cost and has high potential ROI (return on investment). Getting involved isn't a big commitment and could result in gaining contacts through doing. (Okay, it's talking, but for this event talking IS doing.) Those kinds of contacts are worth more than most, because they are based on you, not word of mouth, a resume or mere impressions.

Personal Participation

Being a part of this event is about you. There are advantages to participating in activities like this and reasons for helping out. Personally, I wanted to participate so much that when I couldn't find a way to be a part of things to my satisfaction, I decided to create such a way.

Blogging on my own with little feedback seemed like talking to myself. That's not why I blog. Conversations, discussions, ideas, projects and making a difference are the kinds of goals I have when blogging. It's to do my part. Lots of people are trying to find and implement solutions, so it makes sense to try to help more than just myself. That's what this event will hopefully accomplish.

Involving Others

While it is to help others, I want to involve others for a few more reasons too. One is that I can't do this on my own right now. With all the good resources, tools and blogs that can be used, there is little chance I know of more than a tiny fraction. Another is that by working together we can come up with more creative ideas than all of us working separately are likely to come up with in the same time. Plus all those wonderful ideas wouldn't get shared near as much. Openness and co-operation are also key reasons to do this together. It's not about any one person, but rather about all of us working together.

Together we give each other support. Maybe it's technical, maybe it's emotional, but there are times when we all could use the support. Perhaps it's just talking with open minded people. Yet this is not something to keep to those who already have read and learned about these ideas. By posting about good resources, our views and our ideas in this event we will be creating something that others can use.

Generating Resources

This is a central part of an open event like this. Not only is there the discussions and links to other resources, there's also the end result of the whole thing that's available to everybody. From there things like a PDF or e-book can be created that summarizes the discussions, resources, contributors and anything else related that seems like a good idea.

It's a part of helping the whole. Each person does their part to make the event beneficial for other participants and readers. Together we create something that would be a lot harder to create on our own, and has more functionality and lasting usefulness because of the combined effort. That results in the resources that can be shared and reused later. Not only is it helpful and responsible, it's also the same thing we want to see others doing.

Starting Something

So, let's start something interesting. A blog carnival is just the beginning of the plans waiting to be implemented, and they include, nay require, contributions from many people. What's on the way? Well, I'll leave the description at a sharing and discussion mash-up.

A little success and some iteration can create the opportunity for more success. Sometimes that means growing in audience, number of tools and sometimes it means helping smaller versions get going. How far this goes isn't near as important as getting open discussion and co-operation to become more widespread.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan

Skill Based Grading

IgenOukan@gmail.com (Steven Egan) — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 01:00:00 +0000

While writing my post Understanding in Process an idea for skill based grading came to mind. The inspiration came from comparing the debriefing screens that tell you how well you did something in a game and the normal school grading.

School Grading

In school the grading is fairly familiar to most of us. You do work, take tests and the resulting grades compile into a course/subject grade.

Debriefing Screen

In games the debriefing screen is feedback for that round of play. The results may be compiled in a similar method as school grades, but not always.

Going Back

The big difference I see between these two is the ability to retry. In classes it's normal to not be able to retake tests or redo assignments. While this makes sense from a linear effort and direct comparison with work point of view, I think we could do better.

Skill Grading

Thinking about the way games generally "assess" player performance I realized another big difference. In school you get grades for tasks and compiled grades for a series of tasks. Games will commonly give feedback on skills and sometimes record that. In fact some games focus more on skills than results.

How good you are at a skill is sometimes treated with equal value as over-all results, consistency and effort. This is an interesting direction for assessments.

The odd part I see from that is that some tests become throwaway tests. Basically it's like placement, qualifying and entrance tests/exams. A person takes it, some responses to their results occur and the responses, not the results, are the important part. This kind of down playing for test results could be a good thing.

Have fun, spread the word and tell me what you think,
Igen Oukan