First, just give your thoughts.
I like the book. I think the author is a little to anxious to employ his background as a linguist. Nevertheless, I found it very thought provoking.
Describe your interpretation of a semiotic domain. Why does this matter in traditional learning environments?
Gee describes semiotic domain as "an area or set of activities where people think, act, and value in certain ways." He also says, "By a semiotic domain I mean any set of practices that recruits one or more modalities to communicate distinctive types of meanings." Each of us occupy many semiotic domains: it's a matter of context. We have home, work, school, church, and community domains and more. If you and I "talk the same talk" then we are in the same semiotic domain. If we are in the same semiotic domain, then we would understand each other's jargon. For example, other Java programs would understand what I mean when I say "an abstract class cannot be instantiated" but non-Java programmers would find that statement to be jibberish.
Talk about the "Content Fetish." What does it mean to you and how does it affect your life/profession?
"Content Fetish" refers to the traditional view that learning is all about facts and figures. I as teacher know certain facts that you don't know, and if you learn these facts then you have succeeded as a student and I have succeeded as a teacher.
Lack of content is a legitimate criticism of video games. By content, people are usually referring to transferable knowledge, or skills with value in the market place. But let's be careful here: the same criticism can be made of other activities. For example, I have a black belt in tae kwon do. It was a wonderful learning experience, but I can't say that it resulted in increasing my value to in the job market. Likewise, I think four years of track and cross country was extremely significant in formulating who I am. But no content. Or Boy Scouting: I am an Eagle Scout, but the content I learned -- knot tying, orienteering, fire building -- is of no significance to a prospective employer. So what constitutes "content"?
Choose two of the principles summarized on pg and describe briefly how you might use them together in your educational setting (in a digital or non-digital experience).
4. Semiotic Domains Principle. Learning involves mastering, at some level, semiotic domains, and being able to participate, at some level, in the affinity group or groups connected to them. (This reminds me of Dr. Silber's ETT501 class in which we were required to attend a professional association meeting. It was a chance to "participate...in the affinity group", and it was an excellent learning experience.)
5. Metalevel Thinking About Semiotic Domains Principle. Learning involves active and critical thinking about the relationships of the semiotic domain being learned to other semiotic domains. (This reminds me of the prevelent use of reflections in education. But how does one incorporate reflective thinking in an e-learning course? Also, I think such thinking requires time. People need time to process what they have learned. Such time is usually absent in corporate face-to-face instruction.)
Saturday, January 31, 2009
America's Army: I'd go AWOL if I could...
Describe your first hour with the game. Did you read the manual? Were you confused at all? How did the game prepare you to play it?
My first hour was miserable! I hate video games! No, I didn't read the manual, since there was no manual. Yes, I was absolutely confused. There doesn't appear to be a Help button anywhere. Finally stumbled on a keyboard map, but even that is cryptic. For example, "W" is to move forward (walk?) but I haven't found a move backward. Backspace key is "Drop Weapon", but that's also what you must press to discard a spent shell. (I had to Google "America's Army discard" to find that out.) This was painful.
Describe your second hour with the game. How was it different?
My second hour was no better than my first. I'm trying to get through basic training. I made it through Basic Rifle Marksmanship (I made Sharpshooter, but not Expert Marksman.) I was terrible with a machine gun. I must have shot 20 times before I qualified. I thought the antiartillery gun had a cool effect: when you use the sights to aim it, you can hear "yourself" breathing as if trying really hard to steady the weapon. I tried repeatedly to get through the shoout out house but failed miserably every time. I can't tell the good guys from the bad guys. I keep shooting civilians. Also, I have flash bangs for use in a dark room, but it never told me how to use them. I was also told that I have night vision goggles, but I was never told how to use them. I am afraid i may never get out of the shoot out house. (Maybe I should Google it for tips.)
Try to draw some connections to the Gee readings as well as the Gredler and Squire readings.
About all I can say is it was engaging enough to keep me going. Though truthfully, if I wasn't doing this for a class I would have walked away during the machine gun fiasco.
Anything else?
Where's the learning? Seems to me there should be some multiple choice quizzes ("shoot" at the right answer?) about military history, ranks, protocol, etc. interspersed throughout the game.
I guess 52 year old grandpas are not really the game's target audience.
My first hour was miserable! I hate video games! No, I didn't read the manual, since there was no manual. Yes, I was absolutely confused. There doesn't appear to be a Help button anywhere. Finally stumbled on a keyboard map, but even that is cryptic. For example, "W" is to move forward (walk?) but I haven't found a move backward. Backspace key is "Drop Weapon", but that's also what you must press to discard a spent shell. (I had to Google "America's Army discard" to find that out.) This was painful.
Describe your second hour with the game. How was it different?
My second hour was no better than my first. I'm trying to get through basic training. I made it through Basic Rifle Marksmanship (I made Sharpshooter, but not Expert Marksman.) I was terrible with a machine gun. I must have shot 20 times before I qualified. I thought the antiartillery gun had a cool effect: when you use the sights to aim it, you can hear "yourself" breathing as if trying really hard to steady the weapon. I tried repeatedly to get through the shoout out house but failed miserably every time. I can't tell the good guys from the bad guys. I keep shooting civilians. Also, I have flash bangs for use in a dark room, but it never told me how to use them. I was also told that I have night vision goggles, but I was never told how to use them. I am afraid i may never get out of the shoot out house. (Maybe I should Google it for tips.)
Try to draw some connections to the Gee readings as well as the Gredler and Squire readings.
About all I can say is it was engaging enough to keep me going. Though truthfully, if I wasn't doing this for a class I would have walked away during the machine gun fiasco.
Anything else?
Where's the learning? Seems to me there should be some multiple choice quizzes ("shoot" at the right answer?) about military history, ranks, protocol, etc. interspersed throughout the game.
I guess 52 year old grandpas are not really the game's target audience.
Game Choice - America's Army
I chose America's Army for the following reasons:
It might be interesting to see my opinion of America's Army develop throughout the semester.
- It is one of several that was mentioned in class.
- I want to see how a video game could be used for what is arguably recruitment purposes.
- Having no military background myself, I might learn something (terminology, jargon, rank).
- Curious what can be done with what was likely an unlimited budget.
- Sounds fun enough.
- I have no interest in "fantasy" type games.
- It's free (my favorite price point).
It might be interesting to see my opinion of America's Army develop throughout the semester.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Gredler: Is it a Simulation or is it a Demonstration?
How are games and simulations different? How does the distinction matter?
The straight-from-the-article-answer is “Briefly, games are competitive exercises in which the objective is to win and players must apply subject matter or other relevant knowledge in an effort to advance in the exercise and win. An example is the computer game Mineshaft, in which students apply their knowledge of fractions in competing with other players to retrieve a miner’s ax. …Simulations, in contrast, are open-ended evolving situations with many interacting variables. The goal for all participants is to each take a particular role, address the issues, threats, or problems that arise in the situation, and experience the effects of their decisions. The situation can take different directions, depending on the actions and reactions of the participants. That is, a simulation is an evolving case study of a particular social or physical reality in which the participants take on bona fide roles with well-defined responsibilities and constraints.”
But the most significant distinction which I picked up from this article, in the context of educational games vs. educational simulations, is that with games, everyone is (potentially) a winner, whereas with simulations, everyone is (potentially) a loser, because you failed the task (killed the patient, crashed the airplane), or you completed the task less effectively or less efficiently than did your peers (didn’t make as much money as they did).
Describe an experience you have had with games and/or simulations in an educational environment.
I do not recall any experience with games in an educational environment. My first experience with simulations was a marketing simulation program called Marksim (how clever). This was at Whittier College as an undergrad, about 1976. My team would get together, review some printouts from the previous “quarter”, decide on a course of action (R&D, advertising, etc.), and submit our decisions – in writing – so someone could put them on punched cards and run them on the computer. If everything went well, all teams would have the results of that “quarter” the next day. (It seems that when I was younger I had to spend a lot of time listening to the old guys tell their stories. These days I find myself doing more and more storytelling….)
I once wrote an assembly language programming emulator using JavaScript. The user could actually write and execute their own programs using my “computer”. That was a real simulation, in that programs which the user wrote either worked or didn’t work.
What did you find particularly interesting in the article that you might investigate further during the semester?
I think I may have misunderstood what constitutes a simulation in the context of this course. What I previously considered “simulations”, I would now have to label as “demonstrations”. Consider, for example, statistics simulations. With these simulations (demonstrations), the user typically provides two or three parameters and clicks on Go, the simulation (demonstration) does its thing, displays its results, and it stops. A demonstration of the central limit theorem (the shape of the distribution of sample means approaches the normal distribution as the sample size increases) might ask for a simple frequency distribution and a sample size. For examples, see http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lane/stat_sim/. This website is, in fact, entitled “Simulations/Demonstrations”. I think these would clearly be labeled “demonstrations” in the context of this course, as there is no final objective, no win or lose, and no ongoing dialogue.
The straight-from-the-article-answer is “Briefly, games are competitive exercises in which the objective is to win and players must apply subject matter or other relevant knowledge in an effort to advance in the exercise and win. An example is the computer game Mineshaft, in which students apply their knowledge of fractions in competing with other players to retrieve a miner’s ax. …Simulations, in contrast, are open-ended evolving situations with many interacting variables. The goal for all participants is to each take a particular role, address the issues, threats, or problems that arise in the situation, and experience the effects of their decisions. The situation can take different directions, depending on the actions and reactions of the participants. That is, a simulation is an evolving case study of a particular social or physical reality in which the participants take on bona fide roles with well-defined responsibilities and constraints.”
But the most significant distinction which I picked up from this article, in the context of educational games vs. educational simulations, is that with games, everyone is (potentially) a winner, whereas with simulations, everyone is (potentially) a loser, because you failed the task (killed the patient, crashed the airplane), or you completed the task less effectively or less efficiently than did your peers (didn’t make as much money as they did).
Describe an experience you have had with games and/or simulations in an educational environment.
I do not recall any experience with games in an educational environment. My first experience with simulations was a marketing simulation program called Marksim (how clever). This was at Whittier College as an undergrad, about 1976. My team would get together, review some printouts from the previous “quarter”, decide on a course of action (R&D, advertising, etc.), and submit our decisions – in writing – so someone could put them on punched cards and run them on the computer. If everything went well, all teams would have the results of that “quarter” the next day. (It seems that when I was younger I had to spend a lot of time listening to the old guys tell their stories. These days I find myself doing more and more storytelling….)
I once wrote an assembly language programming emulator using JavaScript. The user could actually write and execute their own programs using my “computer”. That was a real simulation, in that programs which the user wrote either worked or didn’t work.
What did you find particularly interesting in the article that you might investigate further during the semester?
I think I may have misunderstood what constitutes a simulation in the context of this course. What I previously considered “simulations”, I would now have to label as “demonstrations”. Consider, for example, statistics simulations. With these simulations (demonstrations), the user typically provides two or three parameters and clicks on Go, the simulation (demonstration) does its thing, displays its results, and it stops. A demonstration of the central limit theorem (the shape of the distribution of sample means approaches the normal distribution as the sample size increases) might ask for a simple frequency distribution and a sample size. For examples, see http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~lane/stat_sim/. This website is, in fact, entitled “Simulations/Demonstrations”. I think these would clearly be labeled “demonstrations” in the context of this course, as there is no final objective, no win or lose, and no ongoing dialogue.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Game History
Describe an event or function in the history of commercial games that you think may have been or will be critical for the use of games and simulations for learning.
I think the most significant event in the history of commercial games was the first interactive computer game, which according to this article was Spacewar! developed in 1961 by MIT student Steve Russell. From that point on, the success of each game is the result of the cumulative experience of all prior games. And for each advancement in technology, there lies in waiting someone much more clever than I, anxious to take advantage of that new technology and, for a brief moment, push the limits of gaming.
What has happened since the article was written (2005) that may further influence or change the direction of games for learning?
I think the two most significant events since the article was written are (1) the widespread availability of high speed internet connections (broadband) which facilitates the use of games over a large geographic area, and (2) the proliferation of new styles of controllers (such as found in the Wii system) which facilitate more physically interactive game playing, such as bowling, golfing and boxing with the same motions one would use in real life bowling, golfing and boxing.
I think the most significant event in the history of commercial games was the first interactive computer game, which according to this article was Spacewar! developed in 1961 by MIT student Steve Russell. From that point on, the success of each game is the result of the cumulative experience of all prior games. And for each advancement in technology, there lies in waiting someone much more clever than I, anxious to take advantage of that new technology and, for a brief moment, push the limits of gaming.
What has happened since the article was written (2005) that may further influence or change the direction of games for learning?
I think the two most significant events since the article was written are (1) the widespread availability of high speed internet connections (broadband) which facilitates the use of games over a large geographic area, and (2) the proliferation of new styles of controllers (such as found in the Wii system) which facilitate more physically interactive game playing, such as bowling, golfing and boxing with the same motions one would use in real life bowling, golfing and boxing.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
About Hobbit
What did you think?
This games sucks. Besides the obvious complaint that it wouldn't display properly (blurry), there is nothing intuitive about it. I don't even know what commands are available: HELP, COMMANDS, and (question mark) didn't work.
What did you learn?
What was the "content"? I learned nothing. I apparently mastered 2% of the game before being eaten by a horrible troll (repeatedly). I suppose if I someone got farther in the game it would help them know compass points (north, south, east and west) and provide practice with memory and where they are.
Is / why is this useful? For who?
It is of no use to me! It might have been considered fun for someone familiar with the Hobbit, using computer technology available in the early 1980s.
This games sucks. Besides the obvious complaint that it wouldn't display properly (blurry), there is nothing intuitive about it. I don't even know what commands are available: HELP, COMMANDS, and (question mark) didn't work.
What did you learn?
What was the "content"? I learned nothing. I apparently mastered 2% of the game before being eaten by a horrible troll (repeatedly). I suppose if I someone got farther in the game it would help them know compass points (north, south, east and west) and provide practice with memory and where they are.
Is / why is this useful? For who?
It is of no use to me! It might have been considered fun for someone familiar with the Hobbit, using computer technology available in the early 1980s.
ETT590 First Post
Why you took this class?
I am interested in the use of simulations in mathematics education and in IT (information technology) training.
What you want to get out of this class?
Not sure.
Whether you play or have played games regularly?
Never!
What do you think about digital games and education?
My opinions at this time are based solely on Gee chapters 1-3. Maybe there is something we can learn from video games, specifically, how does something which takes so much time and effort retain peoples' interest, and how can we mimic that in education. I am, however, very biased against the pervasive use of video games per se: I think there is a very low return on time invested.
What you do and have done for a living?
I was a computer programmer (mainframe) for 9 years before taking a full time position at Waubonsee Community College. I taught information technology courses for 6.5 years and mathematics for 2.5 years. I left WCC for corporate training during Y2K. I have a total of 15 years experience in corporate training. In January 2008 I returned to programming full time: I am currently a Java developer.
Anything else you want to say?
Not at this time. (That doesn't happen very often!)
I am interested in the use of simulations in mathematics education and in IT (information technology) training.
What you want to get out of this class?
Not sure.
Whether you play or have played games regularly?
Never!
What do you think about digital games and education?
My opinions at this time are based solely on Gee chapters 1-3. Maybe there is something we can learn from video games, specifically, how does something which takes so much time and effort retain peoples' interest, and how can we mimic that in education. I am, however, very biased against the pervasive use of video games per se: I think there is a very low return on time invested.
What you do and have done for a living?
I was a computer programmer (mainframe) for 9 years before taking a full time position at Waubonsee Community College. I taught information technology courses for 6.5 years and mathematics for 2.5 years. I left WCC for corporate training during Y2K. I have a total of 15 years experience in corporate training. In January 2008 I returned to programming full time: I am currently a Java developer.
Anything else you want to say?
Not at this time. (That doesn't happen very often!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
