Overview of Crisis Management SG focused on their learners ’ assessment and evaluation capabilities. This synthesis can help researchers and gamecreators by enlighten the main criteria and techniques for learners ’ assessment andevaluation. The described benefits and limitations of each technique may facilitate thechoice of the most adequate way to evaluate a particular SG.
Bryan Alexander’s Future Trends Forum with Guest Sue Bohle, Serious Play Conference
An interactive discussion on gaming in education
January 17, 2 – 3 PM (EST)
Sue Bohle, Executive Director, Producer, Serious Play Conference, for a lively discussion on gaming in education.
Sue is a leader in the space and has seen tremendous growth and potential of serious games in corporate training and eLearning. The interview has been edited for clarity and length.
++++++++
notes from the webinar:
i had issues connecting and the streams of the guest speaker (Sue) and Bryan will stall when each of them were talking.
examples for formally learning through games
I’d love to hear Sue chat about: Students as game authors, what do you do to encourage reflection on game events?
Dan LaSota:
Is there any intersection between “Minds on Fire” from Mark Carnes, https://reacting.barnard.edu and your conference?
Dan LaSota
To me “simulation” means some scenario that can be rapidly run again and again, with the user/player tweaking variables and seeing what happens. If it’s “fun” there is more of an intersection with games. If not so fun, it might be considered by most more of a model. Computers can and do help with the iteration process because they can reset to T=0 much quicker than human players. Although “role play” is also a kind of simulation.
Facebook group the Tribe:
Minecraft in education.
John Gould with Drexel: he is going now after the school boards about games in education
Noreen Barajas Horizon Project Director, Educause
AI book integrated in junior high Seattle Michelle Zimmerman, article in Forbes,
Keven Diel Lockhead expert on AI, military
gaming as a way to bypassing the metacognitive (thinking about thinking). Without teaching about learning. Number of libraries Nebraska State: games are developed by libraries.
Tobee Soultie gaming industry. National Intelligence Agency for first response and refurbished for teachers and bullying.
Ben Ward, Kansas State University
Joelle Pitts, Instructional Design Librarian and Associate Professor, Kansas State University Libraries
Stefan Yates, Instructional Design Librarian and Associate Professor, Kansas State University
Transmedia, unicorns, and marketing, oh my!: The not-quite epic failure of transmedia design efforts in Oz.
Transmedia storytelling, also called Alternate Reality Games, have been designed to intrigue, engage, and even engineer groups of people since the release of The Beast in 2001. A few colleges and Universities have employed them to engage their student populations and even teach them a thing or two using narrative game mechanics. Presenters will chronicle a highly successful transmedia design effort at Kansas State University, and the subsequent annual efforts to replicate the engagement and enthusiasm. Best practices and not-quite epic failures will be discussed, as will tips (and laments) for marketing to our current student populations.
Glenn Larsen, National Science Foundation
SBIR and Other Funding Sources for Your Game
The National Science Foundation (NSF) awards nearly $190 million annually to startups and small businesses through the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program, transforming scientific discovery into products and services with commercial and societal impact. The equity-free funds support research and development (R&D) across almost all areas of science and technology helping companies de-risk technology for commercial success. The NSF is an independent federal agency with a budget of about $7 billion that supports fundamental research and education across all fields of science and engineering. For more information, visit http://www.nsf.gov/SBIR.
Karen Schrier, Assistant Professor/Director of Games and Emerging Media, Marist College Design Principles for Knowledge Games
Lisa Castaneda, CEO, foundry10|
Mark Suter, Teacher, Bernards Township Schools
How Teachers Can Use VR in the Classroom: Beyond the Novelty
Over the past three years, foundry10, an education research organization, has been studying the potential of Virtual Reality in Education. The research has focused on the implementation, immersion dynamics, and integration of content across the curriculum.
Working with a variety of classroom curricular areas, with students and teachers from 30 schools, we have gathered data as well as anecdotal stories to help illustrate how VR functions in a learning environment. Students from all over the US, Canada and parts of Europe, completed pre/post surveys and educators participated in extensive qualitative interviews in order to better understand what it means to learn with virtual reality.
Please join foundry10 CEO Lisa Castaneda and teachers Steve Isaacs and Mark Suter as we share what we have learned about how to effectively utilize VR for classroom learning through content creation (both inside and outside of the virtual world), content consumption and content integration and overcoming the obstacles inherent in implementation.
Based on the literature regarding games, gaming, gamification, game-based learning, and serious games, several clear trends emerge:
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last year at G4C Nick Fortugno threw some controversy into the conversation about Minecraft by suggesting Minecraft was not a game but a toy. The proposed panel extends that conversation by asking what is the Minecraft experience, can it be defined or categorised and what as game designers and exponents can we take from understanding its zeitgeist and the impact it has had on the serious gaming landscape?
In 2012/23 at both GLS and G4C many presenters made jokes about including the obligatory Minecraft slide and for very good reasons. Minecraft is arguably a game of immense impact. It has been embraced as part of learning programs focussing on seemingly disparate areas from digital citizenship, history, coding and the maker movement. It is probably the first game brought into the classroom by teachers to leverage the out of school groundswell of existing player excitement. It’s impact is multi generational and perhaps more global than any game before it. The fan base and user community/ies are strong and well supported and exemplar of the potential Jim Gee describes for Big G game. This panel proposes to leverage that Big G space in the lead up to Games for Change 2014 and to honor the voices of its players.
Minecraft has been variously described as a game, toy sandpit, learning space, creative environment, virtual world, and game-infused service. But what really are the affordances of this blocky 16 bit program and how can we even begin to define its value to learning? Enter the Minecraft Experience, a global crowdsourced program managed by Bron Stuckey of The Massively Minecraft Project. People engaging in Minecraft activities about the globe are being invited to describe Minecraft in all its contexts and adaptations. The categories for these experiences will emerge from the crowd sourced content as members contribute thoughts, media, resources and questions to build the __Minecraft Experience__ evidence base.
This panel of notable speakers has been drawn together to answer provocative questions about Minecraft’s success and define its relationship to and impact on learning. The panelists have been chosen to represent play in many contexts formal education, informal learning, self-organised learning, schools and non-school contexts. They include game designers, educators, researchers, learners and parents who have each had a personal and professional experience of this and many other games.
Panelists take a position on the Minecraft experience and use the resources provided by members of the project to inform, support and evidence their case.
How are players, educators and researchers invited to contribute?
project wiki to prod, poke, stimulate and support crowd sourced content and dialog
live youth speakers on the panel
social media and wiki activity in lead-up using selected #minecraftproject
video inclusions of educators, parents, kids/youth arguments, evidence and questions
promotion of youth media pieces from existing YouTube etc to support and stimulate various provocative dialogs
livestream of the panel to global contributors with live feedback and questions.
Who could benefit from joining this project and attending the G4C 2014 panel session?
Educators seeking to understand Minecraft’s value to learning
Programs seeking to adapt Minecraft as part of a program of impact or change.
Game designers seeking to build in its wake
Anyone wanting to consider issues of fidelity, adaptation, constructionism, popular culture, and impact in gaming.
The 7th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2021) will be an innovative and interactive virtual gathering for a strengthening global network of researchers and practitioners collaborating to develop the scientific, technical, and applied potential of immersive learning. It is the premier scholarly event focusing on advances in the use of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), and other extended reality (XR) technologies to support learners across the full span of learning–from K-12 through higher education to work-based, informal, and lifelong learning contexts.
Following the success of iLRN 2020, our first fully online and in-VR conference, this year’s conference will once again be based on the iLRN Virtual Campus, powered by VirBELA, but with a range of activities taking place on various other XR simulation, gaming, and other platforms. Scholars and professionals working from informal and formal education settings as well as those representing diverse industry sectors are invited to participate in the conference, where they may share their research findings, experiences, and insights; network and establish partnerships to envision and shape the future of XR and immersive technologies for learning; and contribute to the emerging scholarly knowledge base on how these technologies can be used to create experiences that educate, engage, and excite learners.
Note: Last year’s iLRN conference drew over 3,600 attendees from across the globe, making the scheduling of sessions a challenge. This year’s conference activities will be spread over a four-week period so as to give attendees more opportunities to participate at times that are conducive to their local time zones.
##### TOPIC AREAS #####
XR and immersive learning in/for:
Serious Games • 3D Collaboration • eSports • AI & Machine Learning • Robotics • Digital Twins • Embodied Pedagogical Agents • Medical & Healthcare Education • Workforce & Industry • Cultural Heritage • Language Learning • K-12 STEM • Higher Ed & Workforce STEM • Museums & Libraries • Informal Learning • Community & Civic Engagement • Special Education • Geosciences • Data Visualization and Analytics • Assessment & Evaluation
##### SUBMISSION STREAMS & CATEGORIES #####
ACADEMIC STREAM (Refereed paper published in proceedings):
– Full (6-8 pages) paper for oral presentation
– Short paper (4-5 pages) for oral presentation
– Work-in-progress paper (2-3 pages) for poster presentation
– Doctoral colloquium paper (2-3 pages)
PRACTITIONER STREAM (Refereed paper published in proceedings):
– Oral presentation
– Poster presentation
– Guided virtual adventures
– Immersive learning project showcase
NONTRADITIONAL SESSION STREAM (1-2 page extended abstract describing session published in proceedings):
– Workshop
– Special session
– Panel session
##### SESSION TYPES & SESSION FORMATS #####
– Oral Presentation: Pre-recorded video + 60-minute live in-world discussion with
others presenting on similar/related topics (groupings of presenters into sessions determined by Program Committee)
– Poster Presentation: Live poster session in 3D virtual exhibition hall; pre-recorded video optional
– Doctoral Colloquium: 60-minute live in-world discussion with other doctoral researchers; pre-recorded video optional
– Guided Virtual Adventures: 60-minute small-group guided tours of to various social and collaborative XR/immersive environments and platforms
– Immersive Learning Project Showcase: WebXR space to assemble a collection of virtual artifacts, accessible to attendees throughout the conference
– Workshop: 1- or 2-hour live hands-on session
– Special Session: 30- or 60-minute live interactive session held in world; may optionally be linked to one or more papers
– Panel Session: 60-minute live in-world discussion with a self-formed group of 3-5 panelists (including a lead panelist who serves as a moderator)
Please see the conference website for templates and guidelines.
##### PROGRAM TRACKS #####
Papers and proposals may be submitted to one of 10 program tracks, the first nine of which correspond to the iLRN Houses of application, and the tenth of which is intended for papers making knowledge contributions to the learning sciences, computer science, and/or game studies that are not linked to any particular application area:
Track 1. Assessment and Evaluation (A&E)
Track 2. Early Childhood Development & Learning (ECDL)
Track 4. Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Access, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
Track 5. K-12 STEM Education
Track 6. Language, Culture, & Heritage (LCH)
Track 7. Medical & Healthcare Education (MHE)
Track 8. Nature & Environmental Sciences (NES)
Track 9. Workforce Development & Industry Training (WDIT)
Track 10. Basic Research and Theory in Immersive Learning (not linked to any particular application area)
##### PAPER/PROPOSAL SUBMISSION & REVIEW #####
Papers for the Academic Stream and extended-abstract proposals for the Nontraditional Session Stream must be prepared in standard IEEE double-column US Letter format using Microsoft Word or LaTeX, and will be accepted only via the online submission system, accessible via the conference website (from which guidelines and templates are also available).
Proposals for the Practitioner Stream are to be submitted via an online form, also accessible from the conference website.
A blind peer-review process will be used to evaluate all submissions.
##### IMPORTANT DATES #####
– Main round submission deadline – all submission types welcome: 2021-01-15
– Notification of review outcomes from main submission round: 2021-04-01
– Late round submission deadline – Work-in-progress papers, practitioner presentations, and nontraditional sessions only: 2021-04-08
– Camera-ready papers for proceedings due – Full and short papers: 2021-04-15
– Presenter registration deadline – Full and short papers (also deadline for early-bird registration rates): 2021-04-15
– Notification of review outcomes from late submission round: 2021-04-19
– Camera-ready work-in-progress papers and nontraditional session extended abstracts for proceedings due; final practitioner abstracts for conference program due: 2021-05-03
– Deadline for uploading presentation materials (videos, slides for oral presentations, posters for poster presentations): 2021-05-10
– Conference opening: 2021-05-17
– Conference closing: 2021-06-10
*Full and short papers can only be submitted in the main round.
##### PUBLICATION & INDEXING #####
All accepted and registered papers in the Academic Stream that are presented at iLRN 2021 and all extended abstracts describing the Nontraditional Sessions presented at the conference will be published in the conference proceedings and submitted to the IEEE Xplore(r) digital library.
Content loaded into Xplore is made available by IEEE to its abstracting and indexing partners, including Elsevier (Scopus, EiCompendex), Clarivate Analytics (CPCI–part of Web of Science) and others, for potential inclusion in their respective databases. In addition, the authors of selected papers may be invited to submit revised and expanded versions of their papers for possible publication in the IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies (2019 JCR Impact Factor: 2.714), the Journal of Universal Computer Science (2019 JCR Impact Factor: 0.91), or another Scopus and/or Web of Science-indexed journal, subject to the relevant journal’s regular editorial and peer-review policies and procedures.
##### CONTACT #####
Inquiries regarding the iLRN 2020 conference should be directed to the Conference Secretariat at conference@immersivelrn.org.
For a limited time, free registration is being offered to faculty, students, and staff of educational institutions (including K-12 schools/districts, universities, colleges, museums, and libraries) who wish to attend but will NOT be presenting at the conference or publishing in the proceedings. To take advantage of this offer, you must register by April 19, 2020 using an email address associated with your educational institution:
No further Academic Full and Short paper submissions are being considered at this stage.
##### INTERESTED IN VOLUNTEERING OR REVIEWING? #####
A range of volunteer opportunities are available, including conference internships for undergraduate and graduate students. Some of the roles currently available include session chair/facilitator, moderator, audio-visual/technical support, virtual event greeter/usher, virtual event photographer, virtual event videographer/livestreamer, 2D artist / illustrator
Expressions of interest are also being solicited from scholars and practitioners wishing to join the iLRN 2020 Program Committee to peer review papers and proposals received in the late submission round (closing April 19, 2020). The late-round submissions will be no longer than 3 pages in length, and each Program Committee member will be asked to review no more than two submissions.
##### INTERESTED IN SPONSORING OR EXHIBITING? #####
A number of sponsorship and exhibition opportunities are available for organizations to:
– Meet and interact with key educational stakeholders
– Showcase their products and services
– Connect and collaborate with top researchers / scientists
– Build and strengthen customer / client relationships.
Packages range from US$500 for a basic virtual exhibit booth to US$15,000 for an exclusive Gold Sponsorship.
Toolwire and Muzzy Lane, two digital game-based learning (DGBL) vendors that are making significant strides in higher education through their “serious game” products. The state of DGBL in higher ed is not nearly as prevalent and accepted as it is in K-12, but growing quickly.
Serious games feature evidenced-centered design, whereby data is collected, analyzed and adapted to the knowledge level of the player
Andy Phelps, director of the Rochester Institute of Technology Center for Media, Arts, Games, Interaction and Creativity (MAGIC) and executive committee member of the Higher Education Video Game Alliance (HEVGA),adds that “game-based learning has the opportunity to really challenge our assumptions about linear modes of educational interaction.”
Muzzy Lane, s higher-education-oriented Practice Series games, in partnership with McGraw Hill, feature titles in Marketing, Spanish, Medical Office and Operations.
The Challenge of Creating Worthy GamesBoth Toolwire and Muzzy Lane DGBL products are not of the “Triple A” PlayStation 4 and Xbox One variety, meaning they do not have all the high-fidelity, digital-media bells and whistles that are inside the heavily advertised war games and sports games geared toward the more than $99 billion global video game consumer marketplace, according to gaming market intelligence company Newzoo.
the state of DGBL in higher education consists of very effective digital games of less-than-Triple A fidelity coming out of private companies like Toolwire and Muzzy Lane, as well as from a good number of college and university game design innovation centers similar to RIT’s MAGIC. These include the Games+Learning+Society (GLS) Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison; the University of Southern California Interactive Media and Games Division, the Carnegie Mellon University Entertainment Technology Center and the New York University Game Center.
Course title: IM 554 Developing Skills for Online Teaching and Learning
Topic for this week: Game-based learning, Virtual Reliability, and Augmented Reality
Audience: IM Graduate students working for K12 schools or in business
2. How did GBL change in the past year? Who is the leader in this research (country)? Is K12 the “playground” for GBL and DGBL?
China: Liao, C., Chen, C., & Shih, S. (2019). The interactivity of video and collaboration for learning achievement, intrinsic motivation, cognitive load, and behavior patterns in a digital game-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 133, 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.013
Finalnd: Brezovszky, B., Mcmullen, J., Veermans, K., Hannula-Sormunen, M., Rodríguez-Aflecht, G., Pongsakdi, N., … Lehtinen, E. (2019). Effects of a mathematics game-based learning environment on primary school students’ adaptive number knowledge. Computers & Education, 128, 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.011
Tunesia: Denden, M., Tlili, A., Essalmi, F., & Jemni, M. (2018). Implicit modeling of learners’ personalities in a game-based learning environment using their gaming behaviors. Smart Learning Environments, 5(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0078-6
Pitarch, R. (2018). An Approach to Digital Game-based Learning: Video-games Principles and Applications in Foreign Language Learning. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(6), 1147–1159. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0906.04
min 29 from start: University of Connecticut (chapter 1)
min 58 from start: Dan Getz with Penn State (chapter 2)
hour 27 min from start: Randy Rode, Yale (chapter 3)
