I just managed to write for around two hours into this Blog and it disappeared upon Posting. Lovely. Freshman error not to get this on Word first. Sigh. I've got 8 minutes left, so here goes without benefit of a charming narrative.
Learning Objectives After playing Ludwig, students will be able to: 1. Define and explain four different types of renewable energy sources: combustion, water, wind and solar. 2. Obtain and evaluate information through independent play. 3. Analyze clues and apply solutions in order to navigate the game. Mechanics of the Digital Game according to Boller and Kapp's "Play to Learn: Everything You Need to Know About Designing Effective Learning Games" (2017) Exploration, Collecting, Constructing and Solution. Analog Game Mechanics: Race to the Finish & Collecting, Escape & Solution Analog Game One: Board Game with Race to the Finish & Collecting Mechanics Based on Candyland. Assets: Board with four worlds: earth, air, fire, water. Cards to move you through the spaces. Cards with pieces of energy machines. Cards with renewable energy sources. Cards with natural disasters. Game pieces based on Ludwig the Robot. Goal: Complete the set of all four energy machines with at least one renewable energy source per machine. Avoid natural disasters (tornado, volcano, floor, solar flare) and arrive at the finish first. Learning: each card includes information about the renewable energy source, energy machines, natural disasters Analog Game Two: Escape Room with Escape & Solution Mechanics Based on Escape Room the Game Assets: 4-3D printed keys leading to 4-3D printed energy machines. Cards in Envelopes (box?) with puzzles, description of physics challenges. Hint Cards. Timer. Decoder based on physics solutions. Goal: Team of 4 collaborates to break the codes using physics-based solutions to find renewable energy machines. 60 minute time. It is possible to lose the game. Learning: Players not only encounter physics knowledge through experimentation and solution finding, but also learn the logical practices of analysis and application.
0 Comments
The journey that I have taken to get to play Ludwig, my 2nd mentor game, might in and of itself be called an adventure. With the blindness of a 25-year Mac user, I chose from among many options the game that specifically said, "Windows Only!" I went searching for that cheap Dell laptop from so many moons ago. After a complete inability to reproduce my password, I made the (not really that hard, it's been YEARS) difficult decision to return to factory settings. Oh my! Lost were some assuredly important files that I'd long forgotten. And, of course, the discovery at the end of this multi-day dilemma was that the old workhorse didn't work with Steam. I purchased Ludwig, but it didn't work. Longer story slightly shorter: a week later, I have a new (refurbished and bought off a friend) PC - so off to Ludwig I go! Only to discover that I don't really understand how to take a screenshot in windows. Oh well. This VERY long preface leads me back to the matter at hand: how to use Bloom's Taxonomy to recognize and assess higher-order learning experiences in games.
Notwithstanding my ability to mess up an OS requirement (and, yes, I know I could have changed the game), I found Week 7's assignment to be very engaging. Play three games: your mentor game (Ludwig), The Pack, and Spent. These three games are either educational adventures (Ludwig and The Pack) or simulations (Spent) that integrate Bloom's learning. It is our job this week to analyze how these levels might appear. With Ludwig, a player navigates from a basic level of Understanding (lower-level) with the constant interactions between Ludwig and his friend/boss, Autotronic. Autotronic leads Ludwig through the alien landscape of Earth as he searches for sources of energy. Autotronic supplies directions that Ludwig follows, although it doesn't stop there. Ludwig must Apply his findings and observations to solve puzzles that lead to better understanding of power sources. Ludwig is further required to Analyze small clues that he randomly finds in the landscape, which he then puts together to, again, solve puzzles and increase understanding. At this point in play, I haven't really considered that Ludwig emphasizes Evaluation, since I do think that the play is more analytical and determinative than judging. Creation doesn't seem to be the point of Ludwig, although it may seem that way, since it might feel as though the player is "putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole." I could probably be convinced that what I think is Application could be Creation, but I'll need to keep playing to give this further thought. When playing The Pack and Spent this week, it was clear that both were carefully crafted with learning as an end goal. The Pack is clearly intended for young players, with the protagonist wandering through a simple landscape, acquiring different types of vegetation to appease potential members of the Pack that served certain necessary roles. There does seem to be Lower-Order learning happening in The Pack. Players must Remember where they found certain items, such as seeds or special plants, and they must Understand how to put multiple pieces of a puzzle together (described as an algorithm) to solve a riddle. Possibly through Application, the player puts those pieces together, but I'm not sure that gameplay elevates beyond that point. Spent, on the other hand, certainly requires Evaluation. I lasted 8 days before my money ran out. I was able to see the consequences of my actions, but thought that perhaps, in the back of my mind, I could get away with making decisions that I deemed ethical or responsible (not leaving a sick child at school, getting health care for myself as a single parent). The low finances as a temp administrative assistant didn't go far. There was no Creation to be had, but the level of Evaluation is strong. A comparison of the three makes me aware that Ludwig and the Pack have similar mechanics: wander through a landscape, encounter necessary items, put those items together to solve a riddle or puzzle. While Ludwig has a more sophisticated premise - teach about sustainable energy sources and the nature of energy to a middle-school or high-school level student; while The Pack is intended for a younger audience. Regardless, the sophistication of content doesn't necessarily mean that the learning level is higher or lower by necessity. Instead, the mechanics seem to relate most closely to the Taxonomy. This process got me thinking about how I might want to focus a game meant for a college level. In many of the classes that I teach at the foundational undergraduate level, I stick closely to lower order learning. I remind students that the Freshman/Sophomore/Junior/Senior level of classes exist because we arranged a curriculum to build upon earlier learning experiences. While Bloom's Taxonomy isn't necessarily hierarchical ("lower" and "higher" notwithstanding), education can be. I'd like to think about how the choice of game mechanics can be matched to the desired learning level. If I want to create a game where students Create - which mechanic will work best? I'm looking forward to thinking this through further ... and now I have the PC to make it happen! |
Maureen the Gamer
Professor. Administrator. Gamer. Cat Lady. Not necessarily in that order. Blogging the game design process since 2020. Archives
January 2024
Categories |