Analyzing Game: Serious Games Design Assessment Framework

Here you will find how Eric Klopfer introduces Dr. Konstantin Mitgutsch of Playful Solutions and his Serious Games Design Assessment Framework for analyzing serious games (1:11). They go on to compare other game design frameworks, and discuss the importance of purpose, coherence and engagement in creating a great game (3:19).

The Serious Games Design Assessment Framework will provide some factors to consider as you reflect on some of the games we have discussed this week.  It will also be helpful as you begin to consider ideas for your course project.

From: MIT Ed Tech

Regards

Case Study part III:Designing Zoombinis

Hi, in this video, Scot Osterweil, and Eric Klopfer talk about how Zoombinis came to life, reflecting on the importance of an iterative playtesting process involving kids (3:21), as well the problems that emerge from the strict categorization of games (5:35).

By MIT máster “Ed Tech”

Case Study Part II: early games, Zoombinis

From MIT, educational technology, interesting to see both video to understand the what and how.

Regards

As Scot and Eric play the computer game Zoombinis, they explore how Zoombini players must leverage their wrong answers to solve the puzzle, while in MathBlaster, wrong answers are penalized (4:24).

https://youtu.be/pA9x48Iu1hI

Videogame Case Study Part I: Math Blaster

Dear reader. Here is an excellent chat, this is part of one of my classes at MIT, and I want to share with you

Prof. Eric Klopfer and Scot Osterweil, Creative Director of the Education Arcade at MIT, play and discuss aspects of the computer game MathBlaster. Scot explains how “edutainment games” like MathBlaster are not designed to help students who are struggling with the concepts (5:25). Eric then talks about the importance of substantive feedback for student learning (7:31).

https://youtu.be/vrZbj65Awf4

Regards

Julia

Learn to Problem Solve, Play and Have Fun – Not Code

Hi, I am so glad to share this article, as always Andrzei go on researching and producing new point of view.

Hope you like it

Julia

BY · MAY 24, 2016
I used to feel that it was an excellent idea. The world is app driven now. It seems that every day some new entrepreneur has created a million dollar app. But the truth is, these are fringe examples that get lots of noise. Most people are not doing this. Most coders live a life of tapping away day and night on their keyboard, earning a living. That’s what I did – I was a code monkey for years, and it paid the bills, it didn’t define my life.

Coding is a logical process. You have to analyze a problem and then solve it in a series of logical steps that eventually build up to a solution. Much like a game. At its core, programming is puzzle solving and this to me is the real key. Not the language, but the way in which it makes your mind work. I have spoken about by approach to problem-solving and IF THIS THEN THAT thinking before.

The same processes are there in most games. You have to take a logical step by step approach to solving the problem that is presented to you. Be it how do I kill the bad guy to how do I build the castle I want in Minecraft.

So I would rather my kids get good at playing games and solving problems with logical analysis. Then, if they want to learn to code or feel it would be of use to them, their minds are already prepared!

Let kids learn through play and fun!

Reading Time: 2 minutes (ish)I keep seeing articles stating why everyone should learn to code. The same message is aimed at adults and children, pointing to a new type of digital literacy needed to survive in the new world.I myself have known how to do code in one form or another since my dad showed me BASIC at about 5 years old. In later life, my career relied on me knowing how to code as a web developer. I have built many tools and found being able to code of great benefit to me. It has certainly been a skill that I have made use of a great deal in the last 30 years or so. But does that mean my 9 years old should learn, or even my 4-year-old?

How to make a game 3: What, Then, Should We Be Doing?

card game solitaire

Picture by: cardgamesolitaire.com

Again, nobody’s having issues with meaningful decisions in multiplayer games — it’s single player games that are proving to be the issue here, so that’s what I’ll be addressing. Firstly, for any single-player game, you simply have to have random elements.

If your game doesn’t have randomness, then it has a correct answer, and if it has a correct answer, then there aren’t meaningful decisions for a player to make (it more closely resembles a puzzle as described above). Further, if you care about having any meaningful decisions, then “losing” has to exist in some form, and having several flavors of winning doesn’t count!

Many of you who know about the dungeon-crawling genre known as “roguelikes” might know that they are one of the last defenders of this sort of play in a single-player game. The internet podcast Roguelike Radio recently had a show topic called “Roguelike Features in Other Genres” (listen to this episode here).

I was a guest on this episode, and I predicted that we were going to start seeing more and more quote-unquote “roguelike” features in all genres of single-player games. Not because of how great roguelikes are, but because roguelikes don’t own concepts like “permadeath” (which just means, losing) and randomization at all — up until the 1990s, all games had these qualities.

Here’re a few examples of single-player games that do, in my view, have meaningful decisions.

Klondike (the solitaire card game that came with Windows, which we often just refer to as “solitaire”) is a solid example of a single-player game that has real meaningful decisions. I’ve been playing the game a long time myself, and while it might not be clear to some who’ve only played a handful of games, I notice these moments where I have a real choice that changes the future challenges and even the outcome of the game.

Many of you who know about the dungeon-crawling genre known as “roguelikes” might know that they are one of the last defenders of this sort of play in a single-player game. The internet podcast Roguelike Radio recently had a show topic called “Roguelike Features in Other Genres” (listen to this episode here).

I was a guest on this episode, and I predicted that we were going to start seeing more and more quote-unquote “roguelike” features in all genres of single-player games. Not because of how great roguelikes are, but because roguelikes don’t own concepts like “permadeath” (which just means, losing) and randomization at all — up until the 1990s, all games had these qualities.

Here’re a few examples of single-player games that do, in my view, have meaningful decisions.

Klondike (the solitaire card game that came with Windows, which we often just refer to as “solitaire”) is a solid example of a single-player game that has real meaningful decisions. I’ve been playing the game a long time myself, and while it might not be clear to some who’ve only played a handful of games, I notice these moments where I have a real choice that changes the future challenges and even the outcome of the game.

More recently, Derek Yu’s Spelunky ran with this concept, literally, and became one of the first well-known platformers to do what I’ve always thought platformers should be doing: randomizing the levels. Because the levels are random each time you play, becoming good at Spelunky has absolutely nothing to do with memorization or any “process of elimination”. It has to do with your skill at making decisions in Spelunky.

Desktop Dungeons is not only game with meaningful decisions, but it does so in a brilliantly innovative way. In the game, you gain bonus experience for defeating a monster that’s higher level than yourself. So, you can choose to use potions early-game (usually reserved for the end-game boss) in order to defeat some mid-level monsters to get that extra experience.

gamasutra1.com

Picture: gamasutra.com

It’s a great example of an “ambiguous decision” — you don’t know for certain if the spent potion will be worth the extra experience or not. No level of experience playing other games will have helped you make this decision, either. This is what’s so exciting about games: the idea that when someone comes up with a game that’s new, it exercises your brain in new ways. It forces you to make new kinds of decisions that work in a way that your brain never had to work before.

If we can agree that meaningful decisions are important, then we can hone in, focus our games down on offering as many interesting, meaningful decisions as possible per moment spent playing the game. I call this “efficiency in game design.”

While Klondike does have some meaningful decisions, it has many no-brainers or false decisions — so I’d say it has a rather low level of efficiency in this way. Spelunky‘s a bit higher since it’s real time and you’re threatened most of the time, but there are still some situations that are no-brainers. Desktop Dungeons is highly efficient, and while it may seem to newcomers that there are no-brainers, better players realize that the most obvious moves are rarely the best ones.

And here’s another way to look at the whole “ambiguous decision” thing — this is what makes games special and interesting: even when you won, there was always room for you to have won by more, and you’re not sure how. In contests, you always know how — hit the moles even faster when they appear next time. There’s no ambiguity about what you should be doing. In puzzles, if it’s solved, it’s solved. There may be different ways to solve the puzzle, but all solutions are equal. This feeling of “I wonder how I could improve” is what’s so magical and amazing about games. In a way, games ask us to rise to our unknown theoretical highest level of ability, and this is really valuable.

I propose this philosophy about games not to be pedantic or controlling about how we look at games. It is my sincere belief that the only way we can improve our games is by looking closely at what makes a game a game. I don’t see many people doing this; instead, I see a lot of people simply echoing safe but conversationally useless ideas like “games are different things to different people.”

Again, I propose that we remember that there is a thing called a game, and even if you don’t agree with my ideas, I hope that you do pursue your truth about what games are so that you can focus your games into the most efficient, fun games they can be. To quote the author Robert McKee in his book Story, We need a rediscovery of the underlying tenets of our art, the guiding principles that liberate talent.”

I am sure that this post will be very interesting for who will want to understand some theory and practice.

Cheers

Julia Echeverria

 

 

Peer 2 Peer University

Dr. J. Philipp Schmidt, a research scientist here at MIT, talks about Peer 2 Peer University (P2PU), an online platform that supports peer learning, a type of collaborative learning. In peer learning, learners are responsible for their own learning trajectory but by working together, they learn about a topic as well as other skills. Principles such as openness and creative learning guide the design of this type of community. Check out the segment where Philipp discusses the four Ps (4:10 in the video).

Collaborative & Group Learning > Experts on Collaborative Learning

A variety of education researchers talk about what they see as the benefits of collaborative learning. They point out a number of tools and learning environments that support and embody collaborative learning, as well as discussing their own related work. Scot explains that he does not think of collaborative and individual learning as completely separate (1:24 in the video). Do you agree?

Appearing in this video:

  • Scot Osterweil
  • Professor Yasmin Kafai, University of Pennsylvania
  • Professor Kurt Squire, University of Wisconsin-Madison
  • Professor Barry Fishman, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of Learning Technologies at the University of Michigan
  • Dr. Jeremy Roschelle
  • Professor Sasha Barab, Pinnacle West Chair of Education at the Arizona State University

This video has design for Educationl Technology course at MIT

 

7 datos y realidades sobre Moodle que es interesante conocer

Moodle 2.8 llegó a nuestras manos en Noviembre de 2014. Seis meses después, tal y como nos tienen acostumbrados en las últimas actualizaciones, Moodle 2.9 verá la luz. Lo hará exactamente (si todo va bien) el 11 de mayo de 2015.

Moodle es la plataforma LMS más conocida y utilizada a nivel mundial. No obstante, el uso que normalmente hacemos de ella es muy limitado, utilizando tan sólo una pequeña parte de su potencial.

La siguiente infografía muestra algunas “curiosidades” y hechos interesantes sobreMoodle. Y es que una comunidad de 70 millones de usuarios y unos 300.000 programadores y desarrolladores, por fuerza, da mucho de sí y mucho de lo que hablar.

04_infografia_moodle

Autor: Oscar Montero publicado originalmente en http://www.conasa.es/7-datos-y-realidades-sobre-moodle-que-es-interesante-conocer/#