The following is an email I sent out to various academic librarians working on gaming and learning in libraries, with a focus on information literacy. I hope that by posting it here and as others post their responses on their own sites this discussion will grow. Please join in this conversation. Nicholas Schiller has already added his thoughts to the dialog.

I hope this email finds each of your semesters going well. I want to ask each of you to consider taking part in a dialog about the current position of games for learning within higher education libraries. Recently, I was asked what the most innovative application of gaming in academic libraries was in 2008 year. While I turned to the work of many of you, I was struck by how fewer projects there were compared to 2006 and 2007. This perception played out through many of conferences during 2008 and was something that struck me during GLLS in November.

While more and more libraries are getting involved with gaming through events and even collections, are we seeing the same growth and adoption with gaming and instruction? Has gaming and learning hit a wall within higher education? If so why? If not, where is it evolving?

Each of you has had some part over the last few years researching, producing, and presenting instructional games and applying gaming strategies in academic libraries. Creating gaming nights is a straightforward process. Creating learning games and lessons with gaming strategies on the other hand, is an involved (and sometimes time consuming and/or expensive) creative process. But many of you are doing it on a variety of levels. My question is if our work is spreading or are we just talking to ourselves?

Now is the time to ask questions, discuss, and look to the future. Nick and Mary both have gaming presentations/posters at ACRL at the end of the month. But these are the only two gaming sessions in Seattle. According to the early program for this year's LOEX conference, there are no sessions on gaming and instruction. There are a number of gaming sessions at ALA Annual, but most are focused on public libraries. Where do we fit?

Discussion Questions:

1) What is the current state of games and learning in academic libraries?

2) What are some of the factors to that current state?

3) Based on your experience and research, what are the next steps?

4) What are the factors supporting or preventing those "next steps?"

5) What do the finical and economic situations at many institutions mean for instructional gaming in libraries?

6) What other issues/questions should we be considering?

Thank you all for taking the time to consider taking part in this discussion. I know that there is much work to still be done in our field, but I am hopeful that through collaborations like these we can continue to move forward.

Thank you,

Paul Waelchli

Library Voice's Chad added his thoughts about SRPGs and grinding. He's having a good and long experience (50 hours) with Disgaea, but his narrative progress has recently come to a halt. This has changed the game for him, but also opened up new gameplay elements for him, including the following:

However, once I got to Episode 11, I found that my Brawlers, Warriors, and Scouts (all traditional weapon wielders with swords, guns, and axes) would not cut it. As result, I’ve spent the last 5 hours in the game leveling up my new Mages and Clerics.

Now going back to the drawing board here might really frustrate some gamers, particularly after the amount of time invested in the game. Going back to a beginning level may seem pointlessly redundant, and I could easily become frustrated that I did not create the right characters in the first place. Some may find that leveling up can be a ridiculously boring process, since you simply play previous levels in order to strengthen the weaker characters. I initially thought I would feel the same, but I’m actually enjoying the process of level grinding. And believe me, it is a process...

...As such, I’m seeing and learning things about the game, and about myself as a player, a bit differently. In other words, I had gotten quite comfortable with how I was playing the game. The game shocked me out of my comfort zone at Episode 11, which caused me to stop, re-evlaulate, and play the game in a different way.

Chad's gaming experience translates well to a variety of learning situations, including research. His experience parallels that of an upper-division student I worked with earlier this week. She was very comfortable with the ins and out of EBSCO based databases, but moving her into more subject specialized databases opened up a new realm to explore and search skills to built. Obviously, some of the same skills and strategies still applied but new combinations of subject terms and other search strategies created a new and different experience for her.

In both cases, players and students relying on the familiar and understood skill set created a situation where they needed to expand their existing skills and knowledge base in order to progress. They were able to do a lot with a common set of tools (character classes & databases), but for true mastery and quality of gameplay they needed to add to that skills set- learn new techniques, practice them in a safer area to build them, and eventually apply them to the overall project.

Research can be a grind. But just as Chad has found satisfaction in the act of grinding and slowly advancing his characters, our students can derive the same sense of satisfaction. Granted, not all students are interested in a slow progression and quick results are sometimes needed. But framing a research project in the minds of gamers as a way of leveling up their work is a mindset worth discussing. Grinding research can be a rewarding experience, and one that doesn't need to take the 50+ hours players invest in video games.

Versions of Disgaea are available on the PS2, PS3 PSP, & DS.
Screenshots of the DS version are via RPG Fan

Over the weekend, I had a challenging conversation with a elementary school librarian. He's plays video games with his children at home and likes the idea of gaming in libraries, but is struggle to see how it fits in at the elementary level. We talked about the challenges he sees with bringing gaming into their curriculum.

Our conversation was cut short, as our kids debated who was controlling who was controlling who in Mario Party 8. But I was able to bring up the excellent work that librarians are doing bringing in a variety of game experiences into their libraries. The work done by Chris Harris and Brian Mayer mapping board games to AASL Standards. The work of others holding Alternative Reality Games (ARGs) focused around classroom content. Made for good talking points.

I did give him the link to a good K-12 online presentation on educational gaming that could help support his points when talking with his teachers:

Games in Education: Myths, Realities, and Promise by Sylvia Martinez

While much of it is review for those engaged in the dialogue of games and education, it provides a good entry point for those in K-12 education. She brought up many good points including how traditional edutainment games fail:

“These games fail as authentic learning experiences and do nothing to change the way students learn.”

Martinez also spent time talking about how games in education cannot be isolated just to the game, but need to flow over into peer and classroom discussion:

“As you can see, the role of the teacher is extremely important in balancing gameplay with reflection on the experience.”

“As with many games, the playing is not the power, the learning happens as you analyze mistakes either alone or with friends.”

Martinez treats video games in education like any other instructional technology. Application and reflection are equally important parts of the learning experience. But she points out the same challenges that arose in my conversation with the school librarian:

“The question is: Are games useful in learning or are games useful in school? Right now, unfortunately, these are not the same thing.”

Finding ways to fit games with content and experiences with the existing curriculum as Harris, Mayer, and others are doing is the first step in a long process.

I'm thankful for the challenging conversation about gaming in school libraries. After spending most of my time talking about the educational benefits of gaming, being confronted with the challenging realities of school district pressures, curriculum conflicts, and tight budgets is good. I'm looking forward to continuing our conversation, bringing in other area school librarians, and hopefully (eventually) making some applications for gaming in their libraries.

Martinez's closing thoughts provide words of encouragement for my continued conversation with my discouraged school librarian friend:

“Games are a way to bring joy and excitement into learning, but they need adequate time, matching assessment strategies, and reflective extension activities to make them really worth it.”

I wonder if there is a way for students to play a game on a different topic that would enable information literacy skill development and in which success is dependent on high levels of information literacy abilities?

The next step to gaming within the higher education curriculum is to create games, as you said, "on a different topic that would enable information literacy skill development."  If we think of gaming and information literacy, than just like info lit, the more it is tied to meaningful content the more successful it can be.  

While I've been fortunate to help highlight the work of libraries creating info lit games, we are missing a larger potential.  We can remove the game out of a library context and still teach info lit skills.  And by removing the library context it is possible to remove some of the reluctance that Jenna describe.

There's a lot of work to do on that end, but it's work worth doing.

It’s been a week since I was standing in front of the GLLS 2008 attendees talking about videogames and learning.  While it was only about 15 minutes, it was a conversation that I built over the last two years.  In fact, most of my experience at GLLS 2008 was the summation of the last two years.  That culminating event really changed the tone of GLLS for me.  I mentioned during the “Gaming in Libraries” podcast from GLLS that the tone was different from the year before.  This year libraries are finding their stride.  Gaming in libraries is becoming part of library’s plate of services.

During GLLS 2007, everything felt fresh and exciting.  I felt that libraries and games were just peaking over the horizon and trying to stake a claim.  All the work that Jenny Levine did to put gaming and libraries out there, set the tone.  Henry Jenkins and James Paul Gee laid the groundwork for why gaming was culturally and academically valuable.  I know that I was naïve and wide-eyed in 2007, but in my conversations with people at last summer symposium there were many others just starting to seriously look at gaming.  I’m thankful for the many people in academic, school, and public libraries that were pushing gaming forward at that time.  And I’m thankful for everyone who’s joined in that effort over the last year and a half.

I had a chance at GLLS 2008 to talk about most of my projects: 

• -          Mapping videogames to information literacy standards
  
• -          Fantasy Football as information literacy practice
  
• -          Applying gaming strategies into classroom instruction
  

I also had the opportunity to help highlight the work that other librarians are doing in creating games for teaching information literacy.

I am very thankful for the conversations I had with a number of attendees around these ideas and I hope that the ideas helped spark interest or applications.   There is a lot of work to do with gaming in libraries, but based on the work that the attendees are actively planning and already doing there is a lot of good to come out of the work we are already doing. 

My mission and direction out of GLLS 2008 is much different than GLLS 2007.  In 2007, I left feeling charged and justified in the work I was doing.  People were interested and there was excitement around it.  That excitement paid off during last week’s symposium and I’m grateful for the opportunities I had.  Now coming out of 2008, I am again recharged but for a different mission. 

Applying gaming strategies into education is useful as a teaching strategy and I will continue to talk about ways to apply gaming strategies to teaching.  Mapping information literacy skills to commercial off–the-shelf (COTS) games is important to communicating the value of videogames in libraries and information literacy.  I will continue this effort, expand it to include additional games, and work to formalize it in order to create a guide for others. 

The work that Chris Harris and Brian Mayer are doing mapping board games to AASL Standards and NY State Standards is the model for the next step for my work mapping videogames.  Making the argument that COTS games teach and apply information literacy in the blogsphere was the only place I could start.  But I am hopeful that through a variety of partnerships those arguments can be carried out and applied elsewhere.

It’s taken me a couple of days to sift through all the emotions created at GLLS 2008, but I am eager to pick my gaming advocacy flag back up and help move it into the next battlefield.  While that analogy may be more militaristic than it needs to be, it fits.  This conversation over the curriculum applications of video games is already well underway in higher education and education in general.  Other libraries are already engaged in the conversation too.  I am hopeful that collectively we can integrate gaming in the curriculum.

I perceived a tone shift from the excitement and justification during GLLS 2007 to service and sustainability during GLLS 2008.  While this shift has challenged me personally, the shift is good for the long term.   This shift in tone can lead to a shift in application and ultimately integration.  Games are already being argued for and applied within education.  The more libraries join and support that conversation, the more exiting GLLS 2009 will be.

Even though the work of Gee, Prensky, Jenkins, and others have addressed videogames value to literacy. And with the ALA focusing on gaming and literacy, drawing connections, and increasing our patron/students’ ability… students have still struggled on traditional evaluations. Squire (2005) suggest that the failure is not in the students but in the way our traditional education systems are structured. While the discussion of how our education system assesses students is important, it is not the focus of the post. The successful engagement of students in multiple literacies can start with librarians at every level. Continued documented success of these literacies will lead to institutional acceptance and value.

To work toward that end goal, understanding the multiple literacies students engage in is necessary. Our patrons and students are seeking text that have meaningful context within their lives. Videogames and other transmedia stories are shaping their expectations of what a story can do. A non-linear, multi-layered experience that rewards their previous knowledge is a way for students to flex their understanding and thought processes. This application is important not only for increasing students and patrons literacies but also their information literacy skills. We have the opportunity to seek out these multiple literacies and help students and patrons evaluate and responsibly apply their knowledge.

Engaging these multiple literacies through videogames is just on of the many possibilities and examples we can create. I recorded a podcast segment yesterday for the ALA Gaming podcast on fantasy football. My discussions on fantasy football are focused on more than encouraging libraries to use fantasy football to connect with users of their libraries (which is a good thing). My discussion and application here is larger and I believe ultimately more rewarding:

• Seek out and create connections with existing interest (pop culture or otherwise) that students/patrons already value and have an existing knowledge base. Game stories that transcend videogames and move into graphic novels, novels, and other media involve our readers in deep and complex narratives that allow them to flex those multiple literacy muscles.
• Our job can be to use these experiences and help students recognize the traditional, information, and other literacy skills they are currently practicing through their multiple literacy experiences.

I’ve used the bridge metaphor before and will continue to do so. We have the opportunity to bridge our students/patrons existing knowledge and skills in these multiple literacies to the traditional academic skills and literacies our educational systems value. Our successful bridging may be just the evidence and documentation needed to help create the changes and shifts that leaders like Gee, Squire, and others have advocated for so long.

I missed my "Adventure of Link" links last week, although I had the links combined. A head cold hit me and I woke up out of the haze to realize that it is Thursday. Well, here are some links for this week.

Using traditional games for educational purposes:

Instead of making serious games for education, why not embrace traditional gaming to enhance kids' lives?

The concept and the discussion in the article are good. We talk about games having educational and critical thinking value, but we in academic libraries work to create games to our specific needs. If we looked at games that were out there and the skills they taught, we could not only use their strategies (an application I promote), but we could use the game itself to help teach. Problem puzzles deep in a temple of a Zelda game? Logic puzzle from a Telltale adventure game? Physics challenges and predictions from a FPS? Games provide applications of educational concepts that we could use. GameSetWatch also ran the article from Serious Games Source.

Which is it? A serious game or a simulation?
Clark Aldrich has a quick post talking about each on his site. I think it is easy to blur the line when thinking of what we want to create or what we want our students to experience. The line can also be blurred when discussing educational gaming with administrators. Clark puts it as such:

But what is also tough is when people confuse serious games and educational simulations. Now these are obviously much closer together in any taxonomy. But serious games are light experiences that are easy and fun to engage while building awareness, and educational simulations rigorous develop skills and capabilities.

Cerise weighs in on game cannon:
I've mentioned the quality work at Cerise before. This article looks at the ongoing debate of if games are art/expression or have value... what is the core group of titles. What is the gaming cannon?

Gaming on a grown-up's budget:
Mister Raroo drew criticism from some gaming libraries with his initial column, but his most recent one is a good read for any "grown-up" with a gaming passion. Sometimes our passions and our pocketbooks don't have the same priorities.

Managing my money:
Speaking of budgets, Future-Making Serious Games has an interesting story about a new educational game used to help teens manage their money, learn budgeting, and other financial skills. As someone who's taught money management to 7th and 8th graders, a game to do this would be a welcomed resource. Granted there are many games that apply economic issues, but this is a great use of teaching a process through gaming.

Jessica Merritt compiled a great resource for librarians, of any type, with questions about gaming in libraries, "Bringing Gaming (and Gamers) to Your Library: 100 Tips and Resources."

Jessica's list of 100 collects a lot of previous written information on gaming events, collections, and research. The list adds other items of interest and general tips for libraries looking to bring in patrons, host events, start collection, promote learning, and defend these practices. This list paired with ALA's Games and Gaming wiki are excellent resources for librarians getting started or looking to expand their gaming programs.

Here are a few of the ideas that are relevant for gaming in an educational context:
21. Position yourself as a guide: Gamers will respect you more if you present yourself as a strategy guide for the game, rather than a gatekeeper.

At the reference desk and in the classroom, we need to be seen as guides and "walkthroughs." We are not gatekeepers, that model is past. Gamers often see guides as a crutch when they are stuck. Librarians are there to help when they get stuck, but we can also be there in the beginning as a tutorial.

31. Play games that require collaboration: Get everyone involved when you play games that focus on collaboration and teamwork.

Bee Gallegos from AZ State University described that students responded better to their game Quaratined when paired up an not isolated. Learning and play are not isolated experiences.

32. Be prepared for opposition: Not everyone understands the appeal of gaming, particularly video games, in the library, so you will find that you'll need to defend your actions with academic discussions and statistics.

Resistance and opposition to something new is unfortunately part of the process. Part of the goal of the ALA's Gaming wiki is to provide those resources to librarians to further the discussion and provide assistance.

50. Talking Points about Gaming in Libraries: Use this resource when explaining why bringing games into your library is so important.

51. Games for Teaching Information Literacy Skills: Felicia A. Smith considers how you can use games for education.

I've written about Felica Smith's work before, the link above is her formal article on her word and puzzle games in info lit.

62. Games for Higher Education: 2008: In this piece, Bryan Alexander examines the complexity of gaming, learning through gaming, and more.

When I started this blog back in 2006, there were very few central sources for gaming and education, let alone libraries (The one site I linked to is now dead). But with resources like these librarians have the tools to be successful in gaming for communities and learning.

Thank you Kelly for the link.

Last week the fourth Games+Learning+Society conference happened in Madison, WI. Each year the conference has provided a wealth of information, research, and application on gaming in education. GLS services the research community well by recording their sessions and making them available via Mediasite. Some of this years presentations are already up and online... here.

In addition to the video content, there are a wealth of good blog posts about individual sessions. Serious Game Source had a news story about the start of the conference and James Paul Gee opening statements. The Brainy Gamer has a great write up on Gee's speech and John Rice over at Educational Games Research links to Gamasutra's write up of Gee speech as well.

Mark Chen, who's presented at GLS the last two years, has some nice overviews and commentaries of the day by day sessions: Session 1, Session 2, Session 3 , the second day's Session 3 covering virtual worlds, and Session 4. Mark also provided a list of other blogs covering GLS which is a great resource for more analysis on the sessions.

There were a number of sessions that seem relevant to libraries looking at gaming and I'll post some reflections once I view the session. But one session by Erica and Rick Halverson covered fantasy baseball and the learning that goes on within fantasy baseball games. The Brainy Gamer posted his thoughts on the session and GameSetWatch picked up the session and posted about it as well.

With the wealth of scholarship at GLS and elsewhere, libraries looking at gaming and education should take some time to read through these sessions, view a few presentations, and begin the discussion about what this research means for us in libraries.

I want to post an ACRL workshop proposal that I submitted along with Chad Boeninger, from Ohio University & Library Voice, and Jon Helmke from the University of Dubuque. I'm posting in part to seek feedback on comments on our workshop idea. I am eager to keep librarians moving forward beyond just simply talking about "why" libraries should consider, engage, and apply video games and gaming strategies. While I'm happy to talk about the "why" it is the "how" that is really important. How librarians can actively apply gaming strategies into our programs, services, and classrooms. This workshop is a step in that direction.

Leveling Up Your Librarians: Using Videogame Strategies to Increasing Student Engagement & Motivation

Short Description:

As libraries are talking about the value of videogames, the relevance of gaming in libraries cannot be ignored. The challenge is not in seeing the value, but in finding effective and efficient ways to apply gaming into services and instruction. The workshop will help the participants identify and employ gaming strategies into existing programs. This workshop inspires librarians to start small and introduce gaming strategies with traditional outcomes to immediately enhance student learning.

Long Description:

As more libraries are talking about the value of video games in our communities, collections, and classrooms, the relevance of gaming in libraries cannot be ignored. The challenge is not in seeing the value of video games, the challenge is in finding effective and efficient ways to apply gaming into our classrooms and at reference. Rather than investing thousands into longterm game development, librarians can start applying gaming strategies in their instruction and services to improve student engagement and learning today.

The workshop will provide a framework of gaming strategies based upon the work of James Paul Gee, Marc Prensky, the Federation of American Scientists and others to show that the value in gaming is not in the electronic format, but in how students and players interact with the experiences. This framework parallels much in traditional educational theory and provides librarians an existing base of knowledge to build upon. The participants may already be applying some of these strategies within their libraries. The leaders will help the participants identify and apply these strategies jointly in targeted services or classes to create game-based learning experiences. Using video game footage, the leaders will demonstrate how games apply these strategies to teach players and motivate them forward. During the workshop, participants will bring a example of a information literacy lesson or service that they are currently using at their institution and work with the workshop leaders and other participants to identify and integrate gaming strategies into it to improve their teaching and service. This focused and practical application of gaming into our libraries creates opportunities for librarians regardless of gaming experience to obtain the engaging and educational value of video games.

The leaders will demonstrate gaming strategies by actively using them during the workshop. Time is scheduled for leaders and participants to debrief on the process, identify existing hurdles, and brainstorm solutions. Also the presenters are creating an online toolkit to provide continued support to participants after the workshop. This online toolkit will provide examples of lesson plans that integrate gaming strategies and other information sources.

Students playing video games of all kinds and in all places are actually developing their academic skills by exercising critical thinking and information literacy. Librarians are uniquely placed to build on students’ gameplay experiences to create that vital link between game and academic success. This link is created in classroom instruction by using the very same strategies designed into games to engage and motivate players. Librarians can incorporate video game strategies in reference and instruction to create a relevant and meaningful experience for students. This workshop will allow librarians to start small and targeted gaming strategies, while including traditional outcomes to enhance the learning experiences of students across our campuses.

Learning Outcomes

Participants will:

• Define gaming strategies in the context of educational pedagogy and student learning.
  
• Identify examples of gaming strategies to enhance student learning.
• Create classroom applications of various gaming strategies to increase student engagement and motivation.
• Construct reference service applications with gaming strategies for the enhancement of student access and value.
  
• Develop a lesson plan that integrates gaming strategies for use in an existing information literacy session.

If you have any suggestions for content for the workshop, questions about the format, or any other comments please let me know. The more input on this - the better.

I believe that it is possible to move beyond asking the "why" questions about video games and libraries. Our content does not necessarily need to change to use gaming applications effectively. It is not the "what" that we need to adapt to make gaming work - it is the "how."

With the vs. mode discussion wrapping up for this week, I wanted to take a moment to offer suggestions on how to answer my own question. The round started with Chad's discussion of mastery or "good enough" in games. I replied with a detailed description of games as both "try and die" and "mastery through play" and responded to some of the questions from Library Voice. While the vs. mode supplement provided examples of both styles, it did not address the specific question:

What steps can we start taking now to foster this mentality?

I'm not naive enough to believe that changing the classroom setting and educational dynamic from "try & die" to "mastery through play" is a simple or straightforward process. I may not be naive, but I am a hopeful fighter. There are many pieces to creating this change, both on the front end (classroom) and the back end (educational system) that need to occur for lasting change. But I have faith. Last week's LOEX conference was full of examples of people working to help shift us closer to "mastery through play."

[any information on the LOEX presenters can found... here. The site will be updated with more handouts soon.]

Front End Changes:

• Meet students where they are. We should value our students' experience and use it. Not diminish it. William Weare, Valparaiso University, and Michelle Kowalsky, William Paterson University, spoke on this topic with their presentation "Library Instruction and Student Engagement in the Age of Google."
• 
  
• Engage our students in areas where they already have experience and use the worlds they know. Sara Holladay and I talked about this with our session on using fantasy sports as a bridge to the academic information literacy skills our students need.
• 
  
• Apply various learning styles to reach all players/students. Just as gaming uses a variety of methods to reach the audience, so should we. Merinda Kaye Hensley discussed and provided examples to reach a variety of learning styles in her excellent interactive session: "When the World Grows Smaller: Renewing Your Instruction Methods for International Students Using the Cephalonian Method."
• 
  
• Let the students play. We can lower the barriers to failure and create engaging and dynamic lessons applying gaming strategies.

Back End Changes:

• Assess the comments and attitudes of our students. What was/is their emotional pulse. Candice Benjes-Small and Eric Ackermann from Radford University spoke on assessing comments in their session "Creating An Architecture of Assessment: Using Benchmarks to Measure Library Instruction Progress and Success."
• 
  
• Evaluate our services after the assignments are due. We should be asking the question of if our "game guides" (instruction) was really useful. If not, do we need a better walkthrough guide? Here is the handout from Jeannie Callas' assessment presentation with some examples to help us get started.
• 
  
• We can treat assessment as an assembly process, not the final product. Assessment that is based on the "quest" rather than just the "final boss." This portfolio method of assessment is not new, but it takes the emphasis off of the "good enough" end product (boss battle) and turns it to the process/journey of a portfolio.
  
• 
  
• Librarians should advocate and work for inclusion on the "design team." Are you or is someone from the library on an assessment committee or organization on campus? Does the library have a place at the table? If we are part of the "games" design, then we are in a better longer term position to creating winning products... life long learners.

These are just a few of the many changes we can start to move our educational focus to mastery through play.

If not now, when?

If not you, who?

Earlier this week at the Iowa ACRL Spring Conference, Dr. Roberto Ibarra presented an update from his ACRL National Conference paper. His presentation, "Context Diversity and the Role of Academic Libraries," applied much of the initial findings from his "A Place to Belong: The Library as Prototype for Context Diversity." While his speech had a number of messages for libraries as a whole, I found his "high context" and "low context" discussion important to the appeal and success of video games.

Ibarra described "high context" as a need to have more social and cultural context to communicate and interact with the world. Knowledge and learning in "low context" is isolated and divorced from real world application, it is simply words and tasks. "Low context" learners do not need additional information to make the content meaningful. "High context" learners do. "High context" includes gestures, social setting, history, posture, tone, and status in addition to words and tasks. These learners see the full picture and each part as equally important.

Video games allow a player to be either high context or low context.

Players with a "low context" model can be successful in a game based on the straightforward information a game offers. They can understand the words and text in a game and give it meaning. The task are straightforward tasks the allow the player the ability to keep moving forward in the game. "Low context" players can enjoy the game and be successful with this learning diversity model.

Video games are also "high concept." Players with a "high context" learning style can understand a video game through much more than the information presented in the gameplay. Video games players gain a deeper understanding and meaning of a game with the "high context" elements are applied. Players gain the history of the character, the social tone, and the interactions with non-playable characters (NPCs), in addition to the gameplay and tasks involved in a game.

"High context" diversity, according to Ibarra, includes a personal commitment, is a nonlinear process, and applies comprehensive thinking. Many researchers have said similar things about why video games are engaging and attractive to players. The player has the choice to engage in these aspects of a game and add meaning their.

This is one reason why video games are engaging across cultures and ages. If a player is from a "low context" understanding of the world and knowledge - video games work. They appeal to the factual and direct tasks of learners. But they also work if players live in a "high context" understanding of knowledge based on the comprehensive experience that video games can offer.

Now, I'm not arguing that video games create diversity. Video games do allow all contextual diverse players to be successful. Video games can connect with players regardless of their cultural background. And this is why understanding video games' application of contextual diversity is important. Video games provide a valuable common cultural experience.

Ibarra's keynote was insightful and he pushed that we as libraries can create spaces of both "low" and "high" contextual meaning. Video games are creating diverse learning experiences and our classrooms and libraries can too.

After a busy week of teaching and shoveling out of more Midwest ice & snow, I'm finally catching up on my RSS feeds covering the GDC conference. I wrote earlier in the week on a couple educational focused sessions and some coverage on Nora Paul's mod of NeverWinter Nights. Some of the mainstream video game press covered the session about the University of Minnesota's journalism game.

Kotaku's Brain Crecente (who the game is named after) had a detailed write-up of the session and some more background of the game's history:

"The idea was to develop a game that would reinforce good reporting practices."

In the game, the players take on the role of a reporter (no, not me) who is covering an accident in which a train carrying anhydrous ammonia hits a truck and derails, forcing the evacuation of the surrounding neighborhood.

"We had to create the city...22 different characters," she said.

Students had to figure out what story angle they wanted to take, covering the health, public safety, transportation safety or environmental issues, before getting started. Once they figured that out that have to identify the important questions, collect the necessary background information, find the right sources and interview them, keep notes, and eventually return to the newsroom to write and file a story to the paper's website.

Christ Baker over at WIRED's Game|Life had another write-up, including some personal observations:

Paul says that they were pleased with the result, though there were some bugs and bad design choices. Students didn't like that their avatar didn't have a cell phone, and needed to go back to the office every time they wanted to call a source and set up an interview. The sword and sorcery trappings of NWN were minimized, but still present. For instance, the editor character is built off an ogre-like NWN character type. (Some reporters who consulted on the game said that seemed entirely appropriate to them.)

Due to a programming bug, the ogre/editor will block the virtual Crecente's exit from the newspaper office, and the only way to leave is to do battle hand let him kill you.

It looks kludgey and low tech, which Paul freely cops to. The team at the University of Minnesota are reworking the game on a newer engine. Still, the game seems like it has the potential to be a useful teaching tool.

I look forward to reading more about the experience of creating the game and how the application works out. Last year, presentation slides and other materials were posted about a few weeks after the conference. So I'm hopeful that the session's slides will appear sometime in March.


Photo by Kotaku

Yesterday I wrote about four semester's worth of a review activity using video game strategies. Since I've finally finished up some edits and corrections to my ACRL Gaming & Academic Libraries chapter, I wanted to share part of the chapter discussing this activity. I've had a few questions about the basics of the activity - hopefully this is useful.

The lesson applied the gaming strategies of encouraging inquiry, open-ended exploration, context bridging, scaffolding, and personalization. The students in the course were grouped and given a research question that asked them to find a source within a given format (book, article, website; print or online). The goals worked to motivate the groups and kept them working toward the objective. The students quickly ran through the search process to reach the goal, a logical action within the context of games. Given the specific goal, the students worked to reach that goal in order to complete the challenge as quickly as possible. The challenge the librarians faced was to ask questions of the students and expose their search process more. The video game strategies were effective for engaging the students in discussions about why they took the search path they did. The librarians used a rubric to assess the students’ discussion of how they reached their research source. When asked, the students explained the search choices they made and provided examples that met the rubric.

The lesson incorporated gaming strategies to provide an open-ended exercise and allowed students to explore and find their own way. The students were initially challenged by how to get started with this open-ended lesson. The initial session did not clearly define the learning goals, and because of the large degree of personal exploration the lesson encouraged, the students struggled to get started in the activity. The successive attempts at the lesson provided the students with a framework for the activity. By foreshadowing the lesson a little more, each group was much more willing to dive into the activity, explore the search, and complete the goal. The initial setup of some framework not only allowed the students the confidence to jump in and get started but also created more buy-in and motivation for the overall activity.

This week marked the fourth semester that the information literacy team at the University of Dubuque applied video game strategies into a resource review activity. The activity was originally designed in the spring semester of 2006 as a way to address student fatigue late in a semester. The following semester, we added video game strategies which included: personalization and open-ended/nonlinear navigation.

Over the four semesters, we modified the activity to make the goals more clear and change when we conduct the activity during a semester. At first we used the review at the end of a semester, but based on student feedback we moved the activity to the middle of the semester. It now serves as a review after the set of information literacy instruction. It works very well as a review and occasionally an introduction for some students who didn’t use certain types of sources previously. We’ve received a variety of verbal and written feedback over the semesters. Most students provided positive feedback including:

“I thought the activity was useful, however, it seemed to be a big review… But reviews are always helpful–it made me feel like I knew what I was doing and I feel really confident in my research skills.”

And some constructive negative feedback as well:

“It was a fun activity but we did already know how to find research since we had already done two papers.”

The biggest challenge the activity has faced has not been if the students do well, or the gaming strategies successfully engage students. The biggest challenge has come internally from the librarians resisting the urge to over-structure the activity. In an effort to make the goals clearer for the students, we have struggled against a traditional desire to define the entire process and path of the assignment. The temptation is understandable given traditional instruction that clearly lays out the steps and the process for the students. While the librarians agree with the application of video game strategies, it can be challenging to keep the activity open. Being willing to accept and discuss whatever results the students arrive at, even if they go against what we just taught them, are an important.

When I first used this lesson, I was impressed with the variety paths students used to get to the same sources. The activity can teach both students and librarians a lot, if we allow to the students to choose and trust that regardless of the path and the results there is something to learn.

Earlier this week, I talked about my previous experience and my reflections from this current semester with the student led, multiple path, resource review. Today a colleague of mine, Anne Marie Gruber, taught the same lesson to another class. This is what she had to say about how the information literacy session went:

The Library Dusk lesson was very effective as a model for a student-led review of research strategies. While it is set up as a review of various resources, one student even commented to me, "Wow. I learned a lot today." Even in this 300-level class, several students had never used ILL before, or didn't know what to do when full-text wasn't available.

The "choose your path" pedagogy was very effective. Letting students lead helped them take ownership and stay engaged. While their votes are anonymous, they were willing to defend their choices, leading to great discussion about resource choice. Following the resource review, students made effective use of their work time. They all found some great articles and effectively used the variety of sources we had discussed.

I enjoyed the session as much as the students did, and it was gratifying to see them succeed because of Paul's well-crafted lesson.

Anne Marie is an amazing and dedicated librarian always looking for ways to further engage and help our students learn. I am fortunate to work with her.

For those interested, an asking, here is the link to the powerpoint slideshow of Library Dusk. Any feedback or questions are welcomed.

Last year I created a multiple path database review based on video game strategies. And now, I'm teaching the same class tomorrow. I've spent tonight updating (and fixing a few slides) from last year slides. I'll post about how the class went tomorrow, but until then here is a brief summary of the lesson, experience, and student feedback from last year.

After successful open-ended information literacy sessions applying videogame strategies, the librarians at the University of Dubuque used a student- response system and Power Point to create a multiple path, point & click review for an upper division Communication course. The initial design comprised over 70 slides and resulted in a multiple-path review where the students voted to determine the direction of the research process. The assignment objective was to find two sources from books, articles, or the internet. Every path and choice was hyper linked within the Power Point slides so that any decision the students made was linked to the corresponding choices. Students stayed engaged in voting, reacting to the results, and discussing the choices. Much of the class discussion was peer led and the students engaged each other and debated about what path to choose. A short evaluation with open-ended questions was sent to students one week after the information literacy session. Students’ responses were overwhelmingly positive and included, “I did like how you gave us an option for going our own paths” and “I thought the voting was great.” One student commented that, “It was a lot more fun being able to first handily interact with the research.”

I want to congratulate Mark Wagner and his wife Eva on their new son Clark. Mark is one of the people I've met through my work on Research Quest. Mark's been Twittering about his experiences during the pregnancy, in additional to whole variety of other issues. While I'm not the most active Twitter user (twitter ID: researchquest) as a husband and father I could relate.

Not only is Mark an active Twitter user, but he is an researcher and advocate of video games and education. I've followed Mark's work through his Educational Technology and Life blog for a while. His mBlogger: Research Quest - Create Postost recent post is a great resource for video games and education. The post discusses a conversation he had with a school superintendent, gamer, and father.

Ultimately, he’s sees the dynamic, social, and global nature of his gaming community as a positive alternative to the often “flat” culture of classrooms. (In this sense he doesn’t mean “flat” as in Freidman’s “the world is flat” or Davis and Lindsey’s “flat classroom.” He means it is static and boring as opposed to dynamic and exciting.)

Mark provides a number of resource links to his work including:
Books on Educational Gaming
Educational Gaming Issue Summaries
Chapters from his dissertation on video games & education

If you haven't read any of Mark's work, this post is a great place to start.

Congratulations to Mark, Eva, their new son Clark!

Spectrobes for the Nintendo DS has eaten up most of my gaming time since I first blogged about it. But my video game time has turned into father son time. As I've discussed earlier, my interest in Spectrobes (2007) was based on middle schoolers who choose the game over Pokemon. While the reviews were mixed, 7.5 from 1 Up & 6.5 from Game Informer, I've somehow leveled my creatures up to around 114 of the 128 level cap.

Now before you snicker, go back and look at how Spectrobes is an exercise in patience and persistence. I've used this to connect and help teach my 4 year-old son. My son, like many 4 year-olds, has issues with control and patience. Digging for fossils in the game has helped my son understand the benefits of approaching something carefully and not trying to rush through. It's working in the game. Most weekday mornings we spent some time before work/school digging up some fossils and while he initially struggled he continued to improve. While this patience and control doesn't always carry over into daily life, I've used his video game experience to help remind him during difficult situations.

I bring this up because I do not believe my son's experience is unique. Learning through video games is a useful tool in the larger discussion of kids and video games. Tracey John over at MTV's Multiplayer spent this week and last talking with parents about when kids are old enough for video games. The discussion generated a good number of comments from parents and gamers alike.

As video games are criticized and challenged in the press and government it is important to keep discussing the positive learning experiences children can have through games. Some of my son's positive behavior stems from what he's learning in Spectrobes. Video games can be good teachers at all age levels.

I want to stop feeling so important for student learning and simply see the importance of student learning. The tag line of "computer literacy does not equal information literacy" was attached to a recent report. And while this state was and is true, it should not be a call for librarians to stand firm in traditional instruction and deny our students' skills.

The report should serve as a rallying cry for academic librarians to build bridges, not ivory towers.

While the report "Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future" was released a few weeks ago and outlets like the Chronicle's Wired blog and Michael over at The Information Literacy Land of Confusion mentioned the report - I've read very little discussion on it. Even list-serve threads never created comments. My interest is not in what the report means for academic libraries - the report itself gives recommendations on page 31:

Students usually prefer the global searching of Google to more
sophisticated but more time-consuming searching provided by
the library, where students must make separate searches of the
online catalog and every database of potential interest, after
first identifying which databases might be relevant.

I'm concerned in what this means - or should mean for information literacy. The report discusses how students are getting results but not evaluating them. It outlines how their ability to enter search terms, does not equal an understanding of search processes or strategy. The tag line of "computer literacy does not equal information literacy" was attached to the report. While rightfully so, we as librarians need to apply that computer literacy and not deny it.

Building on our students computer literacy skills is essential. Denying their skills only isolates us as librarians and belittles their perceived experience. Instruction librarians can and should apply our student's computer literacy and use it as a bridge to information literacy skills. Yes, students with searching experience can inflated opinions of their search skills which can create concerns. But these inflated opinions can be tempered with applications of their computer literacy.

My use of fantasy football to open up information literacy depended upon student's basic search knowledge and experience. The fantasy football lesson applied their skills and provided a bridge to academic information literacy skills. Our library used a movie review research activity (that assumed students' computer literacy) to build a bridge to the evaluation and source quality skills of information literacy. Chad from Library Voice used the recent example of the Mass Effect controversy to help to evaluation and creditability skills.

I want to use this report to show the continued need for information literacy. But this report presents the challenge and the opportunity for us, as librarians, to apply the computer literacy skills of today in order to create the information literacy skills of tomorrow.