KimP’s Blog

Spoke yesterday morning at the Centre for Learning Innovation about the Game2Learn Project that my school and class took part in last year. The Game2Learn project used the digital gamemaking software Game Maker with Stage 3 (Years 5 & 6 students) to design and make their own arcade game. The purpose of the project was to produce a set of “How To”  tutorials to place online so that teachers from around the state would have the opportunity to use digital game-making to enhance learning. There have been a number of different projects using Game Maker software in different states of Australia over the last few years, and this Game2Learn Project was a way of the NSW Department of Education dipping their toes in and trying it out for themselves.

Nicholas Perkins from the CLI, visited the school once a week for an hour per class to lead the hands-on, computer lab actual game making strand of the project. In-class time was spent on a “Critical Literacy” strand during the rest of the week as well. In this strand we looked at what games were, who plays games, types of digital games, features of games, games reviews, games narratives and game design. This strand was vitally important as it gave the students the language to talk about games, as well as some important concepts (such as immersion, challenge, fairness etc), it also provided the basis for some writing work we did on games narratives. I’m really interested in this aspect of using games in education – the other learning possibilities and connections that are part of games and game making.

The students (with a partner) all started off making the same game each, as they worked through the activities/tutorials that the tutor had prepared on a game that he had made himself. This  gave the students the opportunity to become familiar with the program and to become aware of the basic features of the Game Maker software. After a couple of sessions, the students were encouraged to start a game of their own, using the skills they were learning in the whole group session. This really pleased the kids as they were excited and enthusiastic about making their own games – which we had been discussing, planning, thinking about and writing about in the classroom.

The kids worked hard to complete their games in the short period, the filming took place, and the various sections (Teacher talk, tutorials, and student responses) are ready to be re-packaged into a single presentation that hopefully will be trialled in a larger number of schools next term, and ready for public release later in the year.

Talking our way into learning …….. I first started to realize the importance and value of computer games when I listened to my own children discussing and playing their favourite game. They would work through the game trying all sorts of problem solving strategies:

• they would pause the game, 

• chat about the best way to approach the current problem, 

• try out their  strategy,       

• try again,        

• work out a new way to solve the problem,   

• swap the controls and let the other player attempt the difficulty,    

• automatically pass the control when they got to a difficulty that they knew the other player was stronger at,    

• chat,      

• discuss,     

• argue !?!

Even when they were not playing the game (ie away from the PS) they would be working out plans, suggesting new ways of approaching problems, hypothesizing possible strategies to try later.  I was continually surprised, not just at the level of engagement with the game, but the amount of thinking, planning, problem solving and talking that was happening around the game.

The TALK that surrounded the playing of the game was substantial, high quality communication.

I wondered then, when preparing to use the Wii in our PE program, if the TALK in the classroom would be as substantive – there are many more people involved, a bigger age gap between oldest and youngest (it’s a Year 4,5,6 class and ages range between 8/9 years and 12/13 years), and the setting was completely different, as was the type of game being played. 

While we were trying out the controls and progressing through the practice sessions  I tried to I listen to what the students were saying as they went ( difficult: chaotic, loud, hilarious, quick )  

Helps: twist it, aim it

Hints: try this, what about that

Suggestions: just twist the controller

Instructions: move the controller to knock/spin the ball

After just one session with the Wii I noticed that even though the depth of thinking and talking was not great, my class were :

• focusing on their language, making it specific and understood by the others
• building a shared understanding of the words they were using
• working together – sharing, listening, compromising
• using new language/vocab in a supportive setting
• problem solving for a shared and important end
• using new language/vocab in a purposeful way

The purpose, at this early stage of our play with the Wii, was to build common understandings, skills and terminology so that our future use of the Wii could be shared by all the class - and the TALK in the session reflected this.

Unfortunately time ran out without us having the chance to talk about the learning that had taken place in the session – usually I would ask the class, in pairs or small groups or individually, to talk or write about the learning that had taken place using our “Thinking Hats” (De Bono’s 6 Thinking Hats) so I don’t have any comments from the class – I will have to make sure that I leave time for this important reflection next time

Lots more to do and to explore. Interesting and exciting times!

We’ve spent a few sessions towards the end of the term getting familiar with the wii controls. No-one in the class has a wii at home (yet – but they are all hinting and asking    ) so we have been working through the “teach yourself” activities/games.

I thought that we would start as a whole class group so that I could hear what they were thinking and saying to each other as we went along. The kids would have a turn at the activity and pass the wii controller on to someone else. This worked well as it gave the more confident kids the chance to show what they could do, and the shyer, less confident students could watch a few times before they were ready to have a go.

The class already had its “pecking order” of the most technologically skilled to less technologically skilled, but this posed a few surprises along the way and it was quite interesting to watch how the class (and the individuals) responded to performing better/worse than was expected.

Generally speaking our skills can only improve (top score of 3 rallies in ping-pong out of a possible 100 – embarrassing isn’t it      ) but lots of excitement, encouragement and hilarity as personal bests were reached (see above mentioned score of 3!!!!!!).