The idea of pacing within a game is not new and certainly not unique to one genre or another. Action, adventure, role-playing, and even puzzle games all require a consideration of pacing. How the player progresses, how the action moves, and how layers of challenge are added are all pacing concepts within game design. The idea of pacing in lesson planning and classroom instruction is not new either, pacing set by teachers, students, or combinations of both are all applied. Education literature has witnessed pendulum swings back and forth between rapid teacher-directed classroom pacing and student-directed variable pacing. Two separate math classrooms found different results in pacing. Sangster (2007) found a quicker paced classroom was beneficial. Vaughan (2005) found that students were more successful when they were able to set their own pacing of a unit before beginning.

Tomb Raider: Anniversary’s challenge in pacing stems its’ heritage and its’ isolated atmosphere. The game throws a large and seemingly open area to explore. The player can explore every gap, cave, and reachable outcropping trying to find artifacts, ammo, and other hidden items. Or the player can seek out the most direct and efficient route out of the room puzzle, progressing forward to the larger goal. This initially creates the feeling of a large area to explore, but quickly the player learns there is typically one, and only one, way to get past the puzzles. There are frequent dead ends for players exploring the area seeking out additional health, ammo, or “lost artifacts.”

The level design does give the player the ability to set their own pace, exploring the open areas for every item or seeking out the solution to the next area. Unfortunately, the level design often creates conflicting pacing. Those looking for the direct route end up exploring because the solution is not immediately clear. And those seeking out each item may stumble upon the exit only to have to return for missed exploration. Over the course of the first half of the game, I’ve experienced both situations.

I believe the game is designed with a slower, methodical pace. A pace that encourages exploration. A pace that reminds the player of how isolated the explorer/robber Lara is. And a pace that was born during an area of game design when there were not clear (or even often stated) objectives, tutorials were not common place, and the rise of game walkthroughs (and sites like gamefaqs.com) were only beginning.

The result of this perceived exploratory freedom is my frequent frustration about where to go and frequent restarts due to missed jumps. The ideas here of pacing tie directly into the directions (and lack of) given to the player. The game asks the player to explore the surroundings and enjoy the journey. While I enjoyed the journey in the first area, by the second area I was focused on the outcome rather than the journey's exploration. I was just trying to get to the next area and goal.

The recent Destrutoid rant on exploration and my classes this week shifted my experience and expectations with Tomb Raider's pacing. The Destrutoid rant talked about exploration in games as a means to either power up and add abilities or as simply as a means to explore and discover. The contrast of exploring to discover and exploring to achieve a goal are at odds with their pacing. When a player's goal is finishing the level or gaining the new ability a tighter, faster pacing keeps the game moving forward and the player engaged in progressing. When the goal is exploration the pacing can be more open and set by the player. These two paces echo Sangster (2007) and Vaughan (2005) from above. The challenge for Tomb Raider: Anniversary is meeting the players' expectation of pacing. When my goal shifted from enjoying the journey to reaching the next area and objective, I was at odds with the game.

Being at odds with the game's exploration pacing, paralleled one instruction experience this week. An undergraduate art history course was looking specifically for articles and resources on their paints and were struggling to find more than a few exact matches. Their goal was to get the required sources and move on to the next assignment and area of their work. The project required them to find tangential sources exploring themes and imagery. The students expectations of classroom pacing were not to search and expand their knowledge and understanding, they were searching to complete the assignment. This difference in research goals effected their expectations on exploration of resources.

In tightly focused research session, the student is able to quickly and efficiently find resources needed. Unfortunately, this can often be interpreted by students as doing a search and finding the closest articles within the first page or two of results. This is not a new concern or expectation by students. Librarians often struggle to help students dig deeper than the top results or to refine a search beyond the "good enough" articles. But when the exploration goal is a quickly paced task to the next assignment, their expectations are at odds with the frequent messy reality of a research journey.

We must also realize that our expectations can be at odds with the students as well. Just as I was frustrated with Tomb Raider slow exploratory pacing, our students get frustrated with libraries with vast resource options to explore. They just want clear directions through the assignment to reach their goal. Not every class can enjoy the journey as much as a Master's of Education class I worked with this week. After three hours of research exploration, and two reams of paper later, they were still enjoying the exploration of every resource and treasure hunt for each new piece of research.

That is the pacing and joy of exploration Tomb Raider: Anniversary expects of its' players. But I was the undergraduate student who just wanted to find my way out of this research cave and out into the daylight of the next assignment. This is a lesson in pacing and exploration that I can take with me into each classroom setting. While I can attempt to inspire the joys of exploration in students, I can also help them understand which path out of their research is the most effective. Just as Tomb Raider's series of jumps, climbs, and ledges may not always feel like the fastest way out of an area, it is often the most effective. In research, sometimes the required information is direct and accessing it is quickly paced. But there are other times when we can help students through the most effective path, which often includes jumps from one database and source to another.

But unlike Tomb Raider's isolated environment, we can help our students understand why this winding research path is important to achieving their desired goal. Unlike Tomb Raider, where the Sherpa died in the opening scene, the individual student is not alone on this exploration. Librarians are there to help pace the exploration, providing both a growing understanding of the journey as a process and effective routes through the deep caverns of research projects.




Cited:
Sangster, Margaret. 2007. "REFLECTING ON PACE." MT: Mathematics Teaching no. 204: 34-36.

Vaughan, Angela L. 2005. "The Self-Paced Student." Educational Leadership 62, no. 7: 69-73.

images from TombRaiders.net

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've spent time over the last two days playing Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword for the Nintendo DS. The game itself is enjoyable, you control the action with the touch screen. Draw a slash on an enemy and Ryu attacks. Draw an upward motion to jump, and so on. It is an intuitive control system. I have enjoyed the interaction and innovation the game offers, even if I'm feeling like I do the same thing again each level until a boss fight creates a new pattern to recognize. In spite of this fault, the action is intense and the game keeps the pace moving.

The gameplay got me thinking about interfaces, video games and library systems. Interfaces, both streamlined and extremely complex are a staple of video games and libraries. Given this history and connection, it is also a good topic for this week's Vs. Mode. After a short week last week with Library Voice and my eventually follow up with applications in the classroom, Chad and I are back for another round...

Interfaces

This week sees the re-release of two very distinct games that greatly depend on their unique interfaces: Myst for the Nintendo DS; and Supreme Commander for the Xbox 360.

Myst is a classic adventure game that most will remember from the early 1990's was a technical marvel with it's detailed graphics and 'life-like' world. While I know this may alienate some, I never was able to get into Myst. I knew a number of both children and adults who were immersed into Myst's world. I shared a dorm floor with someone who spent days drawn into Myst and Myst's sequels. While the world was created to a player in, I always felt a strong disconnect as I continually clicked trying to find the right image to open a door or solve a puzzle. "Pixel hunting" as gameplay, never felt like a game to me. While I respect what Myst did for the industry and the love people have for it, the interface continually frustrated me. And it appears to be frustrating reviewers for the DS version as well.

This streamlined interface, while it created a feeling of immersion, did not make comprehension of the environment and goals a priority. As a player, I was often left wondering where to go next or what to click on to advance my progress.

How many of our students feel the same way? Do our students feel lost in our interfaces, wondering where to click to actually get what they need? Do our students have the Myst like patience to keep trying or do they get frustrated and jump back to their comfort zone of Google?

Supreme Commander is another game releasing this week. It is a story of interfaces to the opposite extreme. It actually recommended that players use 2 monitors to play when it was released last year for the PC.

Two monitors? The level of detail and information available actually encouraged a dual monitor set-up. Now, how many gamers actually used this advanced set-up is up for question. The commitment of time and of the learning curve for the player is great, but supposedly the reward is worth it. Supreme Commander is a real-time-strategy game of controller units, managing resources, and organizing battles on multi fronts. Players are processing a lot of varied data all at one time in order to successful play the game.

Image a dual monitor set-up for undergraduate research? The same student that may complain about the library catalog or a databases' interface may go back to their dorm and use this dual monitor set-up. The game requires a lot from players, but players are capable of meeting those expectations. Should library systems create a high level of expectation as well? Student can map every action in World of Warcraft to a hotkey function, but struggle to keep articles marked in a database or access subject headings. There is a disconnect there. It is not a matter of ability, it is a matter of desire, interest, or perceived value.

Chad my question is, where should libraries fall? Closer to the streamlined and obscure version of Myst? Or toward the complex and rewarding Supreme Commander?

And where, oh where, does EBSCO's new interface fall?
Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword image from MSNBC
Myst images from Gamespot and Nintendo Centrum
Supreme Commander images from IGN

My final wrap-up post from the Iowa ACRL Spring Conference is to take issue with one presentation claiming the death of reading. While the content of the presentation was fine, the speakers made the claim that reading is dying and because of the loss of reading many other societal benefits are dying as well.

Is reading really dying?

Or is it just changing?

The statistics given in the session focused on pleasure reading and fiction reading. 21% of high school students in 2004 read little or nothing for pleasure. 39% of 1st year college students in 2005 read little or nothing for pleasure.

Now, I remember my reading habits taking a dive in college because there was so much reading to do for school that I was soured to reading more. But my issue with their claim isn't with some personal experience, it is with the larger definition. Reading for pleasure happens well beyond just novels. How many lines of text do students read on a daily basis? How much of that is online or game based?

I would argue that high school and college students are reading. And they are reading a lot. The text in video games, the online guides, walkthroughs, and FAQs, the discussion boards, and game review sites. Video game players are reading and connecting all these various forms into one common experience. I'm reminded of a post from theshiftedlibrarian from way back in 2003. Video game players read - they are just not reading traditional texts.

Steven Johnson in his book "Everything Bad is Good For You" talks about this as well. Reading is judged on books because books came first. If video games or some other medium came first, it would be our benchmark. Johnson argues that it is unfair do judge reading against different mediums. Each brings unique and valuable assets.

Reading is changing. What our students are reading is changing. How we advocate reading can change a little as well.



Steven Johnson's "Everything Bad is Good For You" image via WorldCat

Via a post over at WIRED's Game|Life, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) has recently updated their "Top Ten Industry Facts." Some of the facts, like the number of "E" rated versus "M" rated games and the average age of gamers (33), have not changed very much... but none the less it is good to have updated figures.

Sixty-seven percent of American heads of households play computer and video games.

Thirty-eight percent of all game players are women. In fact, women over the age of 18 represent a significantly greater portion of the game-playing population (31%) than boys age 17 or younger (20%).

Gaming spans generations and genders.

Thirty-six percent of American parents say they play computer and video games. Further, 80 percent of gamer parents say they play video games with their kids. Sixty-six percent feel that playing games has brought their families closer together.

Video games, like any other media, can be a family experience. The Wii has brought this to the cultural forefront, but parents gaming with their children is always a positive experience for both parent and child - regardless of the system or platform.

Forty-nine percent of game players say they play games online one or more hours per week. In addition, 34 percent of heads of households play games on a wireless device, such as a cell phone or PDA, up from 20 percent in 2002.

Video games are more than home consoles, handhelds, and PCs. As devices become more technologically advanced gaming will continue to expand.

I spent time over this long weekend playing Spectrobes for the Nintendo DS. Last spring, a family friend raved about the game and how he and all his middle school friends were playing it. They continued to play the game, exploring, collecting, and battling even after Pokemon was released last spring. Since junior high boys were choosing this game over Pokemon, I wanted to try the game for myself (now that it’s at a reduced price).

THESE ARE STUDENTS I WANT IN MY RESEARCH CLASSES

The game is an exercise in patience and persistence. Spectrobes is similar to Pokemon in that a player finds, trains, evolves, and breeds creatures to advance through the game. In addition to this, Spectrobes requires players to find their creatures by digging up fossils and “awakening” them. The game make good use of the DS by allowing players to chip away rock layers. Players drill, brush, or blast the fossils out of the rock. The creatures gain experience in battles and by eating minerals, which are also buried. Excavating these fossils and minerals is an exercise in patience and persistence.

Fossils and minerals could be found anywhere on the ground. The game allows the player to “scan” the ground to see if there is anything there. Once an item is found, the touch screen excavating begins. Because the maps and game areas are large, there is a lot of scanning to be done. I easily spent a few hours simply scanning, walking a few steps, scanning, walking a few more steps outside of the scanned area, and scanning again. This process rewarded me with a variety of minerals and fossils and was strangely satisfying. After playing through the first three areas the scanning began to get tedious.

The amazing thing is, the scanning didn’t get old for the junior high students. They diligently scanned each square inch of the game. The thoroughness of these players is exactly what could make them successful in research. The idea that if I just keep digging, I’m going to find something really good is a great way to look at research. Spectrobes players are not satisfied with the results on the first page or the first ten. They will keep digging. They have the patience to know that quality doesn’t always happen on the first search. Searching takes time and research takes time. Spectrobes players are aware of this and willing to give a search time to be successful.

How many students in our classrooms are willing to do this?

How many have the patience and persistence?

As a generation raised with Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, Spectrobes, and others enter our classrooms and libraries, how can we use their experiences for academic success?

images from 1up.com

Over the past few weeks I’ve invested most of my gaming time into two distinctly different games: Final Fantasy Fables – Chocobo Tales by Square Enix and Rebellion’s LucasArts published Star Wars Battlefront: Renegade Squadron. Besides being games with unnecessarily long titles, they both incorporated some good educational lessons.

Chocobo Tales features a unique mix of minigames and card battling with a RPG story that ties them together. Any game where the bad guy is an evil book (well at least an evil spirit trapped inside a book) is a must play for librarians. The game itself is not revolutionary and really is a mixed bag with a focus on winning minigames to gain cards in order to battle against the evil book. Reviewers docked it points for not being enough of one or the other.

I agree that it struggled to hold together during some of the minigames, but there was enough variety to enjoy almost all the games. The mix of 3D and a “pop-up book” like cel shaded graphics had enough charm to keep me playing. While the game is intended for a younger audience it was an enjoyable play.

This was my first experience with a card battling video game. Playing online against others in America and Japan was a good learning experience. Although there is some randomness to the battles, I was doing probability calculations constantly.

Both of my boys continue playing through the minigames, and now my oldest has played some of the card battles as well. He’s started to learn the “rock-paper-scissors” elements of the card battles. The logic skills he is building are a good start to the type of “if / then” associations he’ll do later in school and life.

images from 1up.com

Slaying myths of video games started as a series of articles earlier this fall but hasn't finished discussing all 7 "myths."

Via John Rice's Educational Games Research blog, back in October John linked to Lee Wilson's ongoing articles in Techlearning. Lee started a series of articles that discussed the seven myths of video games, part 1 covers #1 & #2 and part 2 covers #3 - #5. Part 3 is still on it's way.

Myth #1—Games are all about twitch speed, not higher order thinking skills.

• There is plenty of research, articles, and books available that discuss how games apply higher order critical thinking skills. I've spent time discussing the information literacy value of games in addition to the critical thinking and other higher order skills as well.
  

Myth #3—Learning elements leach all the fun out of games.

• While some recent educational games, like Arden, may be criticized for lacking fun, fun is possible. The danger that educational games encounter is educational content tacked onto some attempt at gameplay. Games like Revolution, focused on the game first and then on the educational content. Educational game designers who start working on the "game" first and then determine what players can learn have an advantage in creating an educational game that is fun. Games do not need to "beat players over the head" with the educational content in order for players to learn something. The potential for players to learn through the experience is something vital to the success of educational games. Bogost's calls this learning, procedural literacy in his book Persuasive Games.
  

Myth #4—Teachers don't need to be involved in the game; kids can do it on their own.

• Educational games are still pieces of education technology and as such still should be paired with discussion, reflection, and analysis of the experience. There is quite a bit that can be learned simply through playing, but there is so much more that students can gain from discussing the game experience with other players. In addition to creating a richer experience for students, discussion also allows educators to see what students are taking away from the game.
  

The articles' author Lee Wilson maintains a blog, here http://www.educationbusinessblog.com/

Thanks for the Prince Symbol

Virtual Learning Worlds is consistently a good read and provides useful insight for education and learning in games. I don't often mention his writing here, but since I'm catching up I wanted to highlight two of his posts from this past month.

A Good Day for Educational Gaming
Misconceptions of Games in Education

Clark Aldrich over at Learning Circuits posted a worthwhile discussion about what games for learning should be called. Serious Games? Simulations? Game-based Learning? Immersive Learning?

The discussion itself is interesting, but regardless of what games in education should be /will be / are currently called the distinctions that Aldrich draws creates a good opportunity for discussion and a better understanding of the full scope of applications and possibilities.

Here is a nice quick slideshow from Tom Crawford that serves as a solid introduction to anyone to the world of educational and serious games.

This is a good resource to get people started and help explain some of the applications and potential of games in education.

Thanks to Elaine Alhadeff, of Future-Making Serious Games, for this link.

In my effort to process everything over the last few weeks, I continue to highlight some useful articles and discussions over the past month. Clark Aldrich's Style Guide is an excellent collection of ideas, terms, and concepts. Aldrich brought up four key considerations for those studying, creating, and applying educational games and simulations.

1. Situational awareness: what do experts see when they come to a scene that others don’t?
2. Understanding of actions: what do experts see as viable options, and trade-offs of each? How and when should one calibrate responses?
3. Awareness of patterns: how and why do things play out? What are small steps now that can have a big impact?
4. Conceptual dead reckoning: understanding the opportunities, committing to a vision, and then navigating towards it.

The questions not only address what should be considered when designing a game, they also work for designing information literacy sessions. In creating lesson plans and research sessions, we should not only consider these questions but find answers for them as well.

1. Situational awareness: Our learners enter the "game" with all ranges of experiences, what do experienced researches see and apply that "newbies" don't. What do we want our students to "see" and understand about a given situation?

2. Understanding actions: Why do our students make the choices in research and sources that they do? What choices should they make? How can we help them understand why certain decisions make sense - and why others do not.

3. Awareness of patterns: Students fall into both patterns of success and patterns of failure. We want to help create productive patterns that will increase their success and efficiency for the future.

4. Conceptual dead reckoning: Create the goal / thesis and develop the path to reach it. If we can help our students create those goals and give them the tools to reach then.

These are good questions that we as educators should consider, not only for our individual lessons but for information literacy programs as a whole.

After finally making my way through Wesley Fryer's posts on NECC 07, I discovered his post on lessons from video games. Fryer shares his thoughts on video games, both from a parenting and educational standpoint. The post touches on variety of issues (some I'll come back to in another post), but one is about the idea of balance. Fryer states:

As human beings, we generally need to seek “balance” in everything we do. Most things, taken to an extreme, can take on a negative and harmful influence.

This holds true for me both as a parent and as an educator. It is important to balance the time my sons spend gaming, but the balance is not different than any other media. In fact I'm more inclined to tip the balance in favor of video games (over TV) given the nature of the the interaction.

Balance in education and information literacy is also important. This summer I am discussing information literacy with my co-workers and planning for the fall. In these discussions, I am not focused on bringing more gaming applications and strategies into our program. I am focused on how to make our program more active, engaging and meaningful for the students. Yes, I believe video games are a component in the success of that focus. But only one of many components that can make our instruction more meaningful and successful for our students. That awareness allows for a balance in lesson planning that keeps library sessions unique and engaging.

The idea of balance and not using video games for sake of video games, is an idea I've touched on before. And I'm not alone. Raj Boora just wrote a well developed post that supports this same idea of using games effectively and appropriately.

Even though games are great for some instructional purposes, they are not the be all and end all. If they are not used in an appropriate context, they have no value. So the trick is to understand those contexts, and these contexts do not include “edutainment” that forcefully grafts “learning” into a game. Kids don’t like the overt learning that is forced on them, not many people do, people like to feel that they are, on their own or with little help figuring out things.

Boora's final five paragraphs of his post provide his main argument about the successful application of games in education. Thank you Mark Wagner of Education, Technology & Life for the link. His article is worth the read, and Mark's blog is an excellent resource as well.

As we plan, create, and use video games in our classrooms and library instruction, we need to consider these issues. Why do we want to use video games and gaming strategies? If the pedagogical reason is something more than, "Because they're fun," then we are moving in the right direction.

Back on June 14th (I know that was a year in blog terms), I co-presented on assessment at an Information Literacy Forum hosted by the Des Moines Area Community College (DMMAC). That's all well and good, but the interesting piece for those reading here about video games and education was the presentation by Lynn McCartney of Heartland AEA.

McCartney is a curriculum and technology director of K-12 schools and spoke on "Digital Literacy, Inquiry, and the Millennials." While the presentation itself was nothing new to those in the field, this was a room full of high school, community college and college librarians and only a few had heard of the technologies she mentioned. Her content was very solid with many of her resources coming from Marc Prensky's work. Even her introduction about students "powering down" was directly from Prensky. Here focus was good and she really connected with the audience (same generation, demographics, experiences as the majority of attendees). It was good to hear the message about the value of gaming and video games strategies out there in a variety of formats. And good to know that she brings that message to high schools and middle school year'round.

She made an interesting distinction between video games and the Wii, separating Nintendo from the Wii. Her comments were a sign of the Wii's mass market appeal and acceptance. My thoughts on it were even picked up by the video game site Infendo. Check out my thoughts on their most recent podcast
I'm about 29:26 minutes in.

I’ve been surrounded by discussions about violent video games over the past two days. With the tragic events at Virginia Tech people are searching for answers. And rightful so. Unfortunately, lawyer Jack Thompson drew a connection to video games on Fox News only hours after the event happened. Chris Matthews challenged Thompson’s claim that video games caused the situation on Hardball. Even Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Phil have weighted in on this topic.

My thoughts and prayers go out to the families effected by this tragedy. The events of Monday gave the classes that I’m working with a lot to talk about. This week we started the violent video game research unit with 4 more English classes. The topic itself normally challenges the students, who are ready to provide anecdotal evidence on why violent games are not “bad.” But with the heightened awareness of this week (4/20 being Columbine’s anniversary), the students have a genuine interest in the topic. While some students argue that “of course they do” others are ready with story after story to disprove their claims. And proof is the essential lesson in this unit.

Using the evidence and looking at the proof, frustrates students who are used to having their opinion be enough proof. But I welcome that. I love their frustration and eagerness to challenge the topic. The focus of their paper is objective and evidence based. By hitting an emotional issue like this, it challenges them to remove themselves from the paper. The students are confronted with the hurdle of pulling their opinion out and solely focusing in a scholarly research. We are back at the process tomorrow and I’ll give you an update.

Photo by RichardAM

Church pastor's have the ability to influence the members of their congregation, religion has a tendency to do that with people. But now I'm excited about a growing number of future pastors influencing their members in a positive way about video games.

At church this morning, I talked to one of the students from the class I spoke with about video games. They had recently held a gaming night at their Seminary library for all seminary students to attend. Here are some of the comments from the gaming night, forwarded to me from the faculty member teaching the class:

It was very cool having a lot of people around playing. It was a good community experience.

I came towards the end of the evening, but I was glad I did. I had a blast with Wii. The last video game I ever played was Nintendo 64, usually Mario Golf, so this was a serious step up for me. It seemed everybody present enjoyed this opportunity to play the games.

We had a larger turnout than I think we expected, which was very good. I think most people had fun, too.

I thought it was lots of fun! I laughed until I stopped.

I had a blast! Didn't get a chance to play with the Wii because it was so popular, but enjoyed gaming with the people who came.

I'm very thankful for the work that Susan is doing (and grateful to be a part of it) in helping pastors break through gaming stereotypes and see the positive (both educational and social) applications of video games. This week they are looking at Second Life as a place for outreach and community.

Every new pastor with knowledge and understanding about video games, creates the opportunity to open more people to the idea and benefits of video games.

After my initial thoughts a few nights ago, I have thought more about what keeps players playing and what they are learning in the process. So I’ve gone back over my notes and the discussions from last October when the McArthur Foundation held a 3 week discussion on video games and learning (it was actually one of my first blog posts over at Bibliographic Gaming. Here are some worthwhile quotes and thoughts from the week on game literacies:

Victoria Carrington: “Computer games are the site of some of these textual practices – practices that I think many of us would agree are becoming highly valued in relation to being able to effectively participate in our communities” (October 23, 2006).

James Paul Gee: “So…the question arises about what sorts of other bumps games make on people’s bodies and minds and what sorts of other effects players have on games and how these two are transcacted (October 23, 2006).” Games can often be more lasting and meaningful experiences, because they are just that – experiences.

Jay Lemke: “… we never use just one of these resource systems all by itselft. In real life we are always using several simultaneously, even if we are not paying attention to all of them (Oct. 23).” Sound like information literacy.

Lemke: “…game interactivity involves not just our responding to the game, but the game responding to us, in ways that were both meaningful and surprising, so that gameplay could be seen as a kind of dialogue or conversation” (Oct. 23). The experience of playing goes beyond simple button pushing.

Gee: “One thing that interests me in video games is that `reading` (taking meaning from the game/text is a form of `writing` (producing meanings). (Oct. 24).” Very similar to some arguments Gee makes in his books.

Brian Thompson: “…most highly motivated, highly skilled players are trained to reflect upon… whatever game they are playing” (Oct. 24). Games provide continued opportunity for critical analysis and reflection.

Lemke: “Authoritarian approaches to learning are counter-productive because they inhibit the playful attitude of experimentation… this kind of play is essential to learning” (Oct. 25). The idea of play is something that can be created in a variety of lessons, not just games.

Linda Polin: “The types of attitudes that make an effective game player require risk taking, an active role in creating the meaning, non-linear navigation and attendance to multiple cueing systems and of course, problem solving and lateral thinking” (Oct. 25). Really, who doesn’t want students that are able to do this?

Gaming at church? Yes.
Youth group gaming nights? Yes.
Video games can teach? Of course.
Games as immoral and wasteful? Not on our watch.

A few months ago I was asked by the Library Director of a local seminary to be a guest lecturer. She was teaching a course on technology in ministry and wanted to include video games. I jumped at the chance and now I'm putting the finishing touches on the class session. The purpose is to build awareness and provide possibilities for these future pastors to use and discuss video games in their congregations.

Here is my outline for my class - any feedback would be great:

I. Gaming Literacy Test

a. Awareness builder / Conversation starter

c. Reaching players where they are at

II. Video Game statistics – “Explore the world”

a. Who’s playing

i. Nielsen household data

ii. Pew internet research

iii. Video game report card

iv. Adults playing too

III. What games teach us – “Recruiting your Party”

a. Learning

i. Prensky, Gee, and a host of others

ii. American Federation of Scientists

b. Social Play

i. Man, Play, and Games

ii. Focus on social interaction

IV. Gaming applications in Ministry – “Conquer your World”

a. Youth Group

i. Gaming nights

ii. Social outreach

iii. Opening a dialog

b. Generational Gaps

i. Youth / Mentor

ii. Parent / Child

c. Serious Games

i. Darfur is Dying

ii. UN Disater Game

iii. Educational games

V. Christian games – “Leveling Up”

a. The right path – why Christian games are worthwhile

b. The hidden path – Failings of Christian games

c. The shadow opponent – violence in Christian games

VI. Violence in video – “The Final Boss”

a. Parent perceptions

b. Research data

c. Parental involvement

d. Awareness and Education

VII. End Credits…Too be Continued…

a. Additional sources

b. Further exploration

I just finished listening to David Warlick's podcast Connect Learning from back on January 8th. David interviews his college aged son while playing Blizzard's World of Warcraft.

While I've never played (two small children and two master's degree's put a stop to the time commitment) I'm familiar with the game and have heard a variety of podcasts on the game. David's interview really shows the complexities and vocabulary of the game. I take a lot of the gameplay and terms for granted, but listening to the podcast gave me the perspective from those outside the game.

There's been a lot written about WOW and the literacy skills involved. But a lot of what I've been reading digs deep into the game. But for anyone just getting started David's podcast is a nice start.

The conversation between father and son and between gamer and non-gamer, isn't all that far off from a reference transaction. "Why are you going that way?" "How come you clicked there?" "What does that label mean?" It's all a matter of perspective.

Image provided by Kingfox via Flickr.com

I picked up on Timothy's Greig's blog a few weeks ago, and this week he posted about a project that really gets at the heart of gaming and gamer's passions - sharing their stories. The idea of gathering stories about game experiences for others to reflect and draw upon. It's within these stories where the meat of why and how games can assist in education. The passion and excitement relaid in these stories can help us understand what grabs and holds a gamers attention. Even if the gamers are recounting specific in game experiences, there are emotional undertones at work.

Ask a gamer to share a gaming experience... and be open to the response. Also be ready to get a curious look that says, "Really? You want to know?" I asked that question of some of the people I talked to waiting in line back in November for a PS3 & Wii. Once they got past the idea that outside there peer group wanted to know, they shared lots of stories. Stories that matter and have deep roots.

Here's the reference & instruction piece - I had a student from one of my classes this spring stop me on the first day to remind me that I had talked with them in a PS3 line. Any hesitation she had about asking questions or asking for help was gone. Asking about games isn't any different than finding out other interests, but it works. Like any culture, like any interest, stories matter.