tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2946891245685136175.post3730439382741825228..comments2011-11-22T13:52:31.463-08:00Comments on Out with the old media, in the with the new media: The World (of Warcraft) Is Not EnoughSteve-ohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10393962547213816650noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2946891245685136175.post-27301075345222878752010-03-10T22:36:59.816-08:002010-03-10T22:36:59.816-08:00(re: jenna) "how can we set up school as a Ga...(re: jenna) "how can we set up school as a Game that every student wants to play?"<br /><br />Answer: Slot machines to determine grades. Or do those not count as a game. Better Answer: If we were to transform school into a game by explicitly identifying win-states, and detailing rule sets, this would not be enough. it would only be half of Kaplan and Kaplan's equation (re: jenna, you wanted me to bring up kaplan and kaplan again), the half termed 'legibility'. We would want to still have 'mystery' built into our school activities and subjects lest we fail to utilize children's sensibilities for fascination and intrigue. In other words, turning boring math into boring math game (with explicit boring rule sets and win states) is not enough. we need to transform math into an intriguing fascinating subject. Something we've seen science educators (Wilensky's fireflies article) do, and historians (last semester's wineberg) do as well. Show students the fascinating reality that makes mathematical or scientific or historical inquiry interesting. Show them competing historical interpretations, or mathematically (mis)informed headlines such as "America's top ten happiest cities to live in."<br />And don't be hardpressed to turn these subjects into actual games, the principles of legibility and mystery may be more important than the actual 'form' (real, virtual, augmented-real, etc.) the subject appears in. <br />Further food for thought, i wonder how many of Jim Gee's learning principles can be captured by the two elegant concepts of legibility and mystery.The Untwitterablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17335659398207623037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2946891245685136175.post-13602461151205565222010-03-10T07:18:50.360-08:002010-03-10T07:18:50.360-08:00Though I'm not a gamer, I like the idea of usi...Though I'm not a gamer, I like the idea of using games as a frame for examining educational discourse. Jim Gee argues that "little-g" games (our play experiences) are situated inside of "big-g" Games (the discourse communities that organize, and give meaning to, the games we play). It's a nice way to start talking about rules, a "win state," and how and why people are allowed to cheat. <br /><br />It's also a way to think about why some people drop out of certain Games: If the frustration level is high, or the rules don't make sense, or there doesn't appear to be a clear win state, anyone in their right mind WOULD quit the game and try another one. So the question becomes: How can we set up school as a Game that every student wants to play?Jenna McWilliamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07767988531102621970noreply@blogger.com