Sunday, July 7, 2013

Analysis of Puzzle, Quiz, and Sports Games

 
W505 Games as Learning Tools
Stage 2 - 2: Analysis of Puzzle, Quiz, and Sports Games


Title: Balloon Juggle vs. Geography Games


Learner's Style:

It has been three years since I have been in the classroom. Because of the time lapse, I do not want to use my memory of my classroom interactions to base this analysis. However, I did want practice assessing the learning style of someone so I decided to use my husband as my target learner.
Kolb

I performed a short Kolb Learning Styles quiz on him and came to the conclusion that he is categorized in the Diverging group of learners. This classification is spot on. He is an artist who uses his imagination to solve problems. He is quiet and reflective while the learning takes place. Additionally, his perspective is wide and includes many solutions.

Prensky

Prensky named ten “cognitive style changes” that can reflect the effect technology has had on learners since the invention of more modern things like Nintendo and personal computers. According to his assessment the maximum score is 50, meaning that one is ore traditional and his learning has not been impacted much by these technologies. If one scores lower the opposite is true; one has been highly impacted by video games, etc.

I used Prensky's scale to find out where on the spectrum of Cognitive Style Changes my husband fits. He scored a 27 which seems to be an appropriate score for someone his age. He was involved with Nintendo, walk-mans, and the like but certainly not as much as today's young student.

Some notable scores were to numbers one and six, where he marked a 4. He is more conventional in relation to response time and prefers to wait and watch before making his first move or choosing his next step. (This also confirms the Kolb classification he is in.) On the other hand, he scores 2s on number 2 and 8, preferring graphics to step by step instructions and fantasy over more realistic learning settings.


VAK
The VAK learning classification system groups students into three categories; visual, auditory, and kinesthetic, or movement. I used an online assessment to determine which of the three my husband most identifies with. His highest score was in the visual category.

As a visual learner, he learns best through written language or through visual means. In order for the visual learner to process new information successfully, they needs produce vivid images in their imaginations and information should be passed on to them through graphics, charts, etc. These techniques allow students to better achieve higher order thinking and critical thinking skills.

Because he is a fine artist, this conclusion was expected. He keeps a notebook with him to keep lists, sketch ideas, and reflect back on. He also prefers to wait and watch others first when approaching a new idea in his head.




Analysis of games

I chose Balloon Juggle and Sheppard Software's Geography Games as the two games to compare.

Balloon Juggle is a kinesthetic game that is played in a classroom with a group of students. The students are divided into teams. A balloon is lofted into the air and the goal is to keep it in the air and respond correctly to a question that is posed by the teacher. Points are awarded for each response and attempt to keep the balloon in the air. Obviously, with the most points given for the correct response and keeping the balloon aloft. But students can also score some points for trying to answer the question correctly and trying to keep the balloon in the air. If neither is achieved, then no points are awarded. The team with the most points wins.

The Geography Games are online interactive and visual map games. The student first chooses the tutorial play where they can click on a country, state, capital, or other topographical item. A computerized voice tells them the name of the what they clicked on and it is highlighted blue. Next to the map is a short explanation of the highlighted item the student can read to learn more. After the tutorial version is played, the student can choose to play a game of varying difficult levels. The places are listed and the student has to drag the place to the appropriate spot on the map or click the appropriate spot on the map. If it is wrong it is highlighted red. Upon completion of that level, there may be another harder challenge that follows. But first the score is given along with the places that were misidentified.


Components                                                            Balloon                              Geography



More than one player                                               strong                                    weak



fictitious                                                                   medium                                  weak



governed by rules                                                      strong                                    medium



outcome unpredictable                                               strong                                     weak



voluntary                                                                    weak                                        weak



With each week of learning about games, I can see that my original components in mt game definition are not as important as I originally thought.



More than one player

In Balloon Juggle it is imperative to have more than one player for the games success. But in the geography map games, one player is sufficient.



Fictitious

Neither game is very fictitious in nature. In Balloon Juggle, math equations are given and to be solved accurately making the game more realistic. However, the aspect of the balloon and tapping it to others gives a sense of fantasy and allows for a low risk atmosphere. In the geography games, the map is very realistic and accurate.



Governed by rules


Both games are governed by rules. In the Balloon game there are several rules to regulate the score, to give time constraints, and to achieve the main purpose of the game to answer the questions and keep the balloon afloat. In the geography games, the student must put the geographical item in the correct place. Although, there are no rewards or penalties given for answers. So rules are not a huge factor in this game.



Outcome unpredictable

In the balloon game, the outcome is completely unpredictable. The teacher has not shared the questions she will ask so one cannot predict how any certain student will respond. One also cannot predict whether the student will successfully keep the balloon aloft. In the map game, the outcome is predictable in some levels because the computer gives you second and third tries to get the correct answer.



Voluntary


As mentioned in my previous post, I don't believe this game component is applicable to learning games. In the classroom environment, a student is usually not given the option to participate or not. Therefore, I believe it is weak in both games.




Comparison:

Because my learner is classified as diverging and visual, I thought the geography map game is one of the best-fit games for him. In this game, one can choose the tutorial version first where the risk is low and can be viewed before it has to be applied. This fits into his Prensky results of wanting to wait and watch before acting. The map is extremely visual; the way it highlights the information and allows the player to manipulate the geographical items. My learner preferred graphics over step by step instructions and this game is a perfect example of this.



Balloon Juggle would be one of the least-fit games for my learner. Because it is based on quick responses and movement, it would single out my learner and cause him to act before he has had time to process the information. It also does not provide any visual cues like charts, graphics, or written work. My learner is quiet and reflective and the social interaction of this game is exactly opposite of his preferred learning style.

3 comments:

  1. I like how you’ve included a lot of reflection on how your ideas about games and their components are changing throughout the course. It makes me think more about my own ideas! Your comparison of the games in relation to your target learner was great because you took all the angles into consideration, mentioning them at the beginning and end of the analysis, and I couldn’t agree more with your logic in recommending geography games to your learner. I also found your side-by-side components comparison very clear, and your analysis of the components following the chart was very thorough!
    On a side note—isn’t it interesting how we keep coming back to the problem whether or not games are really “Voluntary”? It’s interesting because I can’t seem to figure out how I feel about this element. I’m curious to see how your thinking on this component is changing throughout the course!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't have a "voluntary" game component in my definition - closest mine has is "fun" or "entertaining". I saw games as needing something to "hook" players and create "buy-in". Similar, but a bit different.

    I thought it was very interesting how your 'best-fit' game didn't score very high at all on your gaming components. You did a good job explaining why you felt it was a 'best-fit' game for your 'student'. I just wonder what you might think about this particular phenomenon. How does this affect your thinking about learning games or its applicability to the classroom/learning situations?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had alot of fun getting my sister-in-laws help on this weeks analysis. If my husband would have been home, I would have gotten his input as well:) I just gave all 3 quizzes to my guys at work and really hope to get their input on some of the games left to play (I haven't been in the office the past few weeks and so haven't been able to actually pick their brains).

    I'm glad to see you chose 2 games I didn't (it's nice that we all haven't been picking the same ones to get some additional perspective and input on all the options). I agree with you that as time progresses in this class, I continue to question my own original game components as to how applicable they are. Is it possible to have a single game definition for everything out there? I'm still not convinced there is.

    I also appreciate the fact your hubby has learning styles that differ from the ones I've looked at thus far - it's interesting to read about those styles and then see how you've analyzed the games for those styles (whether or not they'd be good fits for that style). Thanks for the input!!

    ReplyDelete