Posts Tagged ‘GBL’

IM554 discussion on GBL

IM554 discussion on Game Based Learning

Here is the “literature”:
this link reflects my recommendations to the SCSU library, based on my research and my publication:

Here are also Slideshare shows from conferences’ presentations on the topic:

Topic :Gaming and Gamification in Academic Settings

  1. Intro: why is it important to discuss this trend
    1. The fabric of the current K12 and higher ed students: Millennials and Gen Z
    2. The pedagogical theories and namely constructivism
      1. Csikszentmihalyi’s “flow” concept (being in the zone)
      2. Active learning
      3. Sociocultural Theory
      4. Project-Based Learning
    3. The general milieu of increasing technology presence, particularly of gaming environment
    4. The New Media Consortium and the Horizon Report

Discussion: Are the presented reasons sufficient to justify a profound restructure of curricula and learning spaces?

  1. Definition and delineation
    1. Games
    2. Serious Games
    3. Gamification
    4. Game-based learning
    5. Digital game-based learning
    6. Games versus gamification
    7. Simulations, the new technological trends such as human-computer interaction (HCI) such as augmented reality (AR),virtual reality (VR) and mixed reality (MR) ( )

Discussion: Is there a way to build a simpler but comprehensive structure/definition to encompass the process of gaming and gamification in education?

  1. Gaming and Gamification
    1. Pros
    2. Cons
    3. Debates

Discussion: Which side are you on and why?

  1. Gaming and Gamification and BYOD (or BYOx)
    1. gaming consoles versus gaming over wi-fi
    2. gaming using mobile devices instead of consoles
    3. human-computer interaction (HCI) such as augmented reality (AR),virtual reality (VR) and mixed reality (MR) ( )

Discussion: do you see a trend to suggest that either one or the other will prevail? Convergence?

  1. Gaming in Education
    1. student motivation, student-centered learning, personalized learning
    2. continued practice, clear goals and immediate feedback
    3. project-based learning, Minecraft and SimCity EDU
    4. Gamification of learning versus learning with games
    5. organizations to promote gaming and gamification in education (p. 6
    6. the “chocolate-covered broccoli” problem

Discussion: why gaming and gamification is not accepted in a higher rate? what are the hurdles to enable greater faster acceptance? What do you think, you can do to accelerate this process?

  1. Gaming in an academic library
    1. why the academic library? sandbox for experimentation
    2. the connection between digital literacy and gaming and gamificiation
    3. Gilchrist and Zald’s model for instruction design through assessment
    4. the new type of library instruction:
      in house versus out-of-the box games. Gamification of the process

Discussion: based on the example (, how do you see transforming academic library services to meet the demands of 21st century education?

  1. Gaming, gamification and assessment (badges)
    1. inability of current assessments to evaluate games as part of the learning process
    2. “microcredentialing” through digital badges
    3. Mozilla Open Badges and Badgestack
    4. leaderboards

Discussion: How do you see a transition from the traditional assessment to a new and more flexible academic assessment?

Recommendations for games and gaming at LRS

Gaming and Gamification in academic and library settings (paper)
Short URL: 

Based on the literature regarding games, gaming, gamification, game-based learning, and serious games, several clear trends emerge:

  1. Gaming and gamification in the sense of game-based learning is about using games and game-like tactics in the education process, for greater engagement and better learning outcomes. However, this is only the first level of such initiative. The second and higher level is about involving students in the game-building and gamification of the learning process (as per Vygotsky’s Zone of…) thus achieving student-centered and experiential learning.
  2. When hosting games and gaming in any library, “in-person” or electronic/online games are welcome but not sufficient to fulfill their promise, especially in an academic library. Per (1), an academic library has the responsibility to involve students and guide them in learning how to engage in the building process required in true game-based learning.
  3. Game-based learning, gaming and gamification in particular, in educational (academic library) settings must consider mobile devices and the BYOD movement in particular as intrinsic parts of the entire process. Approaching the initiative primarily by acquiring online “in-person” games, or game consoles has the same limited educational potential as only hosting games, rather than elevating the students to full guided engagement with game-based learning. If public relations and raised profile are the main goals for the academic library, such an approach is justified. If the academic library seeks to maximize the value of game-based learning, then the library must consider: a. gaming consoles, b. mobile devices as part of a BYOD initiative and c. cloud-based / social games, such as MineCraft, SimCity etc.
  4. Design for game-based learning, gaming and gamification in educational (academic library) settings must include multiple forms of assessment and reward, e.g. badges, leaderboards and/or certificates as an intrinsic part of the entire process. Merely hosting games in the academic library cannot guarantee true game-based learning. The academic library, as the forefront of a game-based learning initiative on campus, must work with faculty on understanding and fine tuning badges and similar new forms of assessment and reward, as they effectively implement large scale game-based learning, focused on the students’ learning gains.

Recommendations for LRS

  1. In regard to LRS, the gaming and gamification process must be organized and led by faculty, including housing and distributing the hardware, software and applications, when needed.
  2. The attached paper and the respective conclusions summarized in four points demand educational and experiential background, which is above the limits of the LRS staff. In addition, the LRS staff has clearly admitted that the pedagogical value of gaming and gamification is beyond their interest. This recommendation is not contradicting to the fact and opportunity for LRS staff to participate in the process and contribute to the process; it just negates the possibility of staff mandating and leading the process, since it will keep the gaming and gamification process on a very rudimentary level.
  3. The process must be further led by faculty with a terminal degree in education (Ph.D.) and experience in the educational field, since, as proved by the attached paper and 4 point conclusion, the goal is not a public-library type of hosting activities, but rather involving students in a pedagogically-sound creative process, with the respective opportunity for assessment and future collaboration with instructors across campus. This recommendation is not contradicting the fact and opportunity for LRS library faculty to participate actively in the process and contribute to the process. It just safeguards from restricting the process to the realm of “public-library” type of hosting activities, but failing to elevate them to the needs of an academic campus and connecting with instructors across campus.
  4. This conclusions adhere to and are derived from the document recommended by the LRS dean, discussed and accepted by LRS faculty in 2013 about new trends and directions in academic libraries, namely diversification of LRS faculty; breaking from the traditional library mold of including faculty from different disciplines with different opinions and ideas.