Digital Game Based Learning As
The Greatest Motivator (DGBL), we mainly
used theoretical referents to support the game design. For that, we used
Prensky’s work to orient the game with the DGBL
philosophy of learning by doing and fun as the greatest motivator.
Later we applied Gee’s properties in our Game
Design as described in. Gee claims that a good learning game: Allows the player to take advantage of the
game system to obtain their goals.
Offers microcontrol mechanics to enhance the intimacy feeling of the
player. Offers Experiences to the
learner for good learning Uses modeling, as for model the situations in game or
those from the real world.
These are functions of the mental
apparatus that control other functions. These functions include: Inhibition
Control, Working Memory, Planning, Cognitive Flexibility and Fluency.
Furthermore, we interviewed Dr. These techniques include: Operant Conditioning: According to McLeod, Operant Conditioning means roughly changing of behavior by the use of
reinforcement which is given after the desired response. Token Economy: According to, it
consists in providing reinforcers such as points, tokens, cards, etc.
associated to the realization of desired behavior. Self-Instructions: According to Banús
SelfInstructions can be addressed in these steps: 1) The therapist or monitor
acts as a model and carries out the task, while speaking aloud what they are
doing; 2) The kid carries out the task instructed by the therapist; 3) The kid
does it again by directing himself speaking aloud; 4) the child will it once
more however currently verbalizing in an exceedingly low tone; 5) the child
guides his own behavior by intern autoinstruction whereas finishing up the
task.
OUR PROPOSAL The theoretical and
empirical support that the literature review gave to this project was used to
build an inclusive ARenriched videogame for Logical Math Skills Learning. For
that, we proposed a set of Game Design Principles. With those in mind, we built
a prototype with simple AR. Our prototype is classified as a Spatial
Video-Displayed game under the classification in. In this section we show the game design, the
description of the development process and an overview of the final product in
its current version.
Game Design For the game design,
besides getting advice on ADHD, we also asked for pedagogical advice. Thus, we
consulted professor Maria Antonia Canals, UdG’s professor emeritus and former
elementary Mathematics teacher. Canal’s work and materials can be consulted in. The Game Design principles we proposed for designing Inclusive AR
games are as follows: Comply with Gee’s
properties: The game should comply with James Paul Gee’s properties as
shown previously. Content-centered games
should be avoided. Instead, Player/Learner centered games are preferred. Be Fun/Appealing: The game should be as fun
for the kid, as possible. Because fun is the best motivator DGBL experts
recommend. Also, the likes of the kid should be taken into account. Consider Executive Functions: The designer
should have in mind, the lack of attention, problems in retention, and delay
aversion ADHD kids show frequently.
Reward by “Token Economy”: The
game allows the kid to exchange tokens (coins, points, stars) into new items,
prizes or scenes. Stepwise games are recommended for Self-Instructions, in such
a way that the game performs an action and the kid reenacts it by repeating
constantly into a game mechanic. Induce
“Operant Conditioning”: The game should reward desired actions on the game that
lead to learning. As these are design principles the “correct” application is
hard to acknowledge and it relies highly on the designer’s experience. In each
level the kid learns something new and later levels expect the kid to scaffold
on the already learned abilities to continue. Also, as the kid completes an
action that ultimately leads them to win the game, it rewards with coins. These
are meant to be used to purchase items (these feature is still not developed). With
that in mind, our final software architecture looks as shown in Fig. 1. Note
that with the use Unity3D as the Game Engine and over the Interaction Framework
we built a set of objects common to all the mini-games in order to ease the
development of the game. The web version of the game is available at
http://bcds.udg.edu/Gremlings/. In the game design phase, with the principles
in mind and inspired by Canals’ exercises, we proposed several game concepts.
In the end, we selected two mini-game game concepts, one for fostering pairing
and one for ordering (called It’s Raining Gremlings and The Gremvolution
respectively) both included inside one game called Gremlings in my Mirror.
Following the techniques
abovementioned the game rewards with coins when the kid advances or completes a
scene (Token Economy and Operant Conditioning).
In The Gremvolution (Fig. 2- (2))
the kid uses the marker to place the gremlings in the right switches (the kid
has to realize that the gremlings should be ordered in size) or the bomb
explodes. Unlike the previous mini-game, this game is lost when the bomb
explodes, but the kid can try as many times as he or she wants. The same coin
rewards are applied. We also constructed a standalone version of the game with
a system to record player’s milestones which we used to carryon the observation
scenario we describe next.
OBSERVATION SCENARIO We conducted
an observation scenario where we observed children interacting with Gremlings
in my Mirror.
A. Setting We allowed 20 students
from a school to play the game freely. This school integrates children with
special-needs of access to learning. The scenario had the help of the school’s
psychologists and professors who helped aiding students when needed. We
averaged the timestamps to compare both. As this was a one-shot study, our
observations are preliminary. That said, we were able to see that kids with
special needs took slightly more time than the others and that their
performance is similar.
B. Results 1) Students
performances while gaming We divided the group in two: Kids with and without
special needs. We averaged the timestamps to compare both (Fig. 3 and Fig. 4). It
is noteworthy that all students clearly had problems at the beginning of the
session because they were not familiar with the interaction method (the AR
marker). Thus, they tended to use the mouse or the keyboard to control the game
which can be difficult and could turn the game hard to use in a noncontrolled
environment. Once they were able to use the game, they got acquainted with it.
2) Teacher’s Feedback In order to
obtain a more qualitative view of the results, we interviewed the headmaster of
the school who participated in the experience. When asked about the
implications and importance of the game aimed to its purpose: The
logical-mathematical thinking, she said: (Comments here are translated from the
transcript, the original interview was held in Spanish): “The motivation to use
the game the kid shows helps them to be very concentrated in it” About children
motivation: - “I totally think they enjoyed the experience because I saw the
kids joyful. First, when they were able to start the game, and after that, when
they were able to play it. Most of them did not even want to leave the game.
Just a few of the kids couldn’t find a motivation to play the game, but the
majority enjoyed it." - “I think the players who did not enjoy the
experience could not do it because those were very particular cases (as a
strong Mental Retardation, for example).
About the technology: - “Teachers
nowadays have to use a lot of tools to maintain the attention and achieve learning
on students. And technology has opened the possibility to achieve our learning
goals. Technology allows teachers to rapidly reach more pertinent, timelier
goals even with less effort. These tools are great tool for us, because they
allow the teacher to have a role of counselor who presents the kid with goals
and tools. The teacher won’t be replaced ever, but technology is now our
right-hand.”
You Also Like:
No comments:
Post a Comment