Over the last two years, I have spent a lot of time reading studies about K-12 and college courses that incorporate elements of game design. Sometimes, these elements are directly adopted into the structure of the course:
- educators use points instead of traditional grading systems (Jackson, Sheldon, me and my colleagues);
- students conduct serious role-play and pursue situated goals (Shaffer, Travis, Kelly);
- students are able to chart their own path through the “world” based on personal interests and goals;
- assessment is integrated directly into the learning experience; etc.
Essentially, this is the gamification of education.
Other educators take a blended content-alignment approach, in which situated learning occurs within a video game or multi-user virtual environment, which is then framed by a more traditional course design (studies with River City, QuestAtlantis and Second Life often take this approach).
Reading about these studies is exciting. The people involved are smart, creative and frequently brave, taking on the simultaneous and challenging roles of designer, educator, and (when necessary) evangelist. Although much of the foundational work underlying games-based learning has already been done—few papers fail to cite such deservedly famous names as James Paul Gee, Kurt Squire, Constance Steinkuehler, Marc Prensky, or David Shaffer—it’s still a very new field focusing on an uncommon application of a very new medium.
any of the research projects I read about have something in common: a strong focus on narrative. The divide between narrative and systemic gameplay is fundamental to game design; the degree to which they overlap depends on the game in question, which in turn depends partly on the personal preferences of the game designer and the players. Narrative is frequently presented as being fundamental to the players’ engagement with the game. Without a story, the suggestion seems to be that students will not be able to take on a new role—and that assumption of a role that exists partly within and partly without the student’s real identity is critical to situated learning.The project I’m working on is called Game Attributes and Mechanics in Education, or “GAME” for short; cute, right? It’s a design-based research project, which means that our tools and methodology will continue to evolve based on what we learn. At the moment, we are in our second semester using GAME in a graduate-level course about teaching with technology.
Up to now, we have refrained from implementing a narrative in our GAME-based course. We chose not to for three basic reasons:
- We wanted to focus on establishing the core technology and pedagogy first;
- Very little of the previous research supporting narrative as an important component of games-based learning was conducted with graduate students, rather than K-12 or undergraduates;
- We felt that a poor implementation of narrative, one rejected by the players, would be quite detrimental to learning outcomes and students’ experience of the course.
Now that the technology and methodology have been through one cycle of refinement and revision, we are again looking at implementing an overarching narrative into our design. I’m hoping that I have a few readers in academia with similar research interests. If so, I want your take: Do you see a clear case in favor of including narrative in the research, or in your own experience?
For non-academics, a quick survey:
- What’s your educational background (what did you study, to what level, and what do you do now)?
- How would you feel about taking a course that integrated significant RPG-elements and social gaming-style mechanics?
- What kind of “story,” if any, would feel appropriate in such a class?
Sources not exactly cited
- Dickey, Michele. Game design narrative for learning: appropriating adventure game design narrative devices and techniques for the design of interactive learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development (2006) vol. 54 (3) pp. 245-263
- Hickey et al. Designing assessments and assessing designs in virtual educational environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology (2009) vol. 18 (2) pp. 187-208
- Jackson, Janna. Game-based teaching: what educators can learn from videogames. Teaching Education (2009) vol. 20 (3) pp. 291-304
- Kelly, Kathleen. A Yearlong General Education Course Using “Reacting to the Past” Pedagogy to Explore Democratic Practice. ijb.cgpublisher.com
- Ketelhut, Diane. The Impact of Student Self-efficacy on Scientific Inquiry Skills: An Exploratory Investigation in River City, a Multi-user Virtual Environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology (2007) vol. 16 (1) pp. 99-111
- Malone, Thomas. What makes things fun to learn? Heuristics for designing instructional computer games. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSMALL symposium and the first SIGPC symposium on Small systems (1980) pp. 162-169
- Shaffer. Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & Education (2006) vol. 46 (3) pp. 223-234
- Travis, Roger. (2010, August 15). Operation LAPIS is ĪTE!. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://livingepic.blogspot.com/2010/08/operation-lapis-is-ite.html. (2011, February 15).
- Warren et al. A MUVE towards PBL writing: Effects of a digital learning environment designed to improve elementary student writing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education (2008) vol. 41 (1) pp. 113-140
February 16, 2011 at 1:00 pm
So glad you've started this conversion, Max. My own "practomimetic" courses use narrative above all because the learning goals and objectives of the courses themselves involve narrative on such a fundamental level. On the other hand, although I do think that every course, whatever the methodology, implies a practomimetic narrative about the student reaching learning objectives, I don't think the kind of recognizably traditional overarching narrative I use is appropriate for courses that don't have learning objectives specifically in the register of narrative.
I would argue, though, that some kind of ARG narrative like the ones I use as the wrapper is always appropriate: these wrappers simply gamify the goals, objectives, and assessments of my courses so as to expose that implied narrative and 1) engage the students much more fully; and 2) (more importantly) move the students towards a design-perspective on the skills and knowledge embodied in the objectives.
I sincerely hope this great post generates a bunch of discussion.
For bibliography of mine (since you're doing us all such a service by actually citing in a blog post), see also:
Travis, Roger and Michael Young (2010) "Operation KTHMA" in Learning to Play ed. Khine.
Travis, Roger (2010) "Bioshock in Plato's Cave" in Ethics and Game Design ed. Schrier and Gibson.
February 16, 2011 at 3:24 pm
Thanks, Roger! Can't tell you how much I enjoyed listening to you, Jorge and Scott on Experience Points.
Yes, your courses seem to lend themselves particularly well to a narrative framing device, given how the subject of storytelling echoes through the material as well. I plan on looking very closely at your design and experiences when we implement GAME in a humanities course.
Jesse Schell has also responded (http://twitter.com/#!/jesseschell/status/37887948238102528). His take, responding to my question "Can situated learning take place sans narrative," is "sure."
February 16, 2011 at 3:38 pm
I think the question of narrative — if we are going to speak of any kind of 'story' in the process of education — might usefully be presented in more pragmatic terms.
Is the point of view first, second, or third person? In other words, is the student living the narrative, or watching the narrative, or is someone else telling them what they are doing in the narrative? Is it a cyoa narrative, or are they one step removed as in watching a movie?
In other words, what kind of narrative experience could a college course possibly present?
If the student is living the narrative, then you could take the gamification process to its limit and present (e.g.) homework as quests and tests as bosses with a piece of the narrative getting unlocked at each successful step. Alternatively, part of the course could require that for each 'quest' or 'boss' the student write their own narrative and create their own arc.
But, quite honestly, this sounds really labored and artificial. I'm not sure that narrative can really function well as either a method or an experience if it is used simultaneously as a hybrid of both. If the narrative is both a tool and a tale, the whole thing starts to get a bit too 'meta' and post-modern for me…
Another pragmatic question would be the structure of the narrative. Freytag pyramid, three-act, five-act, kishotenketsu, … Probably something simple would be ideal, unless the point of the course is specifically developing narrative for video games. I would avoid the Hero's Journey for an enormous number of reasons; primarily its complexity, linearity, and aniquity…
But that's formal narrative. The whole, newly-beloved idea of emergent narrative is something else; taking the stories the students tell each other about what they did and how they did it and working those into forms of narrative might be an interesting exercise as well.
It sounds like a fascinating adventure and I wish you luck.
February 16, 2011 at 3:59 pm
@Jeff For my purposes "meta- and post-modern" is exactly where I want my students to be.
Also, just to amend my comment above slightly, I meant to write "I don't think the kind of recognizably traditional overarching narrative I use is necessarily appropriate. . ."
Thanks for the compliment on the podcast, Max!
February 17, 2011 at 8:35 am
This is a very exciting project Max. My own studies are more focused on social impact games rather than games-based learning, although the two are both incredibly interesting and interconnected.
On the subject, I'll side with Jeff on this one, a meta-narrative needs to be selectively imposed according to the classes context. It might not fit.
I think narrative creates layered learning opportunities. Story and "gameplay" in this case, for a lack of a better term, need not achieve the educational goals. They can compliment each other.
I want to add that many discussions around games-based education programs seem to emphasize a universally applied curriculum for all students. Role-playing can be a powerful educational tool that can incorporate narrative. This might mean a different kind of curriculum for different students at different times. In the sources that I've browsed, the concept mostly comes up in regards to training exercises or teaching about systems that already have roles built in – our justice system, for example. But I see no reason why a more fictionalized narrative couldn't fit the framework as well.
Also, I second Roger's thanks for the compliment on the podcast. 🙂
February 17, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Max, I can't really speak to graduate-level course design. But I was a high school English teacher in a former life, and your post got me thinking about what I encountered there.
What's striking about K-12 education in this country is how gamelike it already is – and how shitty the "game" it creates is.
At least in the schools I taught in – upper-middle-class suburbia – success in school was more about gaming the system than any discrete gain in knowledge or skills. That wasn't the kids' fault, or even their parents', necessarily; my district was, like every other one these days, obsessed with test scores to the point of fetishism. The fact that the standardized tests were, at best, only tangentially related to the curriculum (and that, of course, state and federal funding was so closely tied to test scores) made the situation even more ironic and sad. The obsession with scores was like playing video games only for the Achievement points – which are also demonstrably meaningless yet inexplicably alluring. The joy of learning/playing is replaced by a misguided focus on an inherently meaningless external reward.
My educational philosophy was really about breaking down the meta-game of "points" and helping the kids rethink assessment so that it was more meaningful. Some of my happiest moments as an educator were when my students would have that "eureka" moment where they would begin to see themselves as agents in their own education rather than players of someone else's game. Their goals transformed. The grade became a byproduct of their hard work to improve as a reader/writer rather than the end goal of their learning. Our relationship as student and teacher would accordingly become more like writer and editor than reader and author (or player and designer). It didn't always work – the rules of the game were too deeply ingrained in many students, and too rigidly enforced by the rest of the system – but when it did, it was remarkable. My classes were designed such that by the time kids got to the test, it'd be a breeze compared to what they were used to (not that I didn't spend time preparing them for the tests, but they were never the main focus).
I did employ some game-like activities in my lessons, and some of those were quite effective in engaging the kids. Although my English classes had larger themes for the year – e.g., is human nature good or evil? – I'd be hesitant about deploying some overarching "narrative," complete with its own reward system, with the high school crowd. There were already too many competing incentives they were dealing with. Besides, they'd gotten so good at gaming the system already I'd worry they'd just seek the most efficient ways to "game" my meta-game.
That said, I very much agree with Jorge's comment above that you have to be aware of students' different learning styles and incorporate a variety of activities in order to engage them in different ways. I wonder if in that sense, any "narrative" you create for the course should be kept loose, so that you can have more freedom to explore it in different ways throughout the semester.
In any case, I hope some of this rambling is helpful.