Since my two sons were nice enough to wake up at 4:45 am (back asleep by 5:30) and 5:45 (still awake), I've had some time this morning to catch up on the RSS feeds.

Being a former political operative and lifetime political junkie, I'm excited by announcement and push from the ECA for YouTube questions for the presidential debate. GamePolitics is highlighting the videos here. They just published a handful more today. Most are well thought out and produced. I'm excited by the fact that gamers are getting into the advocacy role and being politically active.

Fresh off his appearance on The Colbert Report, Ian Bogost's recent Gamasutra article is a great read. My brain's not ready yet to analysis it's meaning for library games, give me a few more cups of coffee and then we'll see. So I hope to return to it soon.

Also, if you haven't used or listened to the resources from EDUCAUSE I mentioned back in June. EDUCAUSE now has video from the Spring 2007 Conference on Immersive Worlds

Immersive Learning Environments: New Paths to Interaction and Engagement," presents highlights from the 2007 ELI Spring Focus Session and discusses the use of ILEs such as online games, simulations, and virtual worlds to support teaching and learning.

Finally, I'm excited that GameSetWatch picks up the activity from GLLS 2007. Research Quest gets mentioned in the post. I've always enjoyed GameSetWatch's collection of stories and posts, which just outside of mainstream gaining. Maybe it's related to the fact that GameSetWatch's Simon acknowledged his personal interest in libraries and even considered librarianship.

Since my write-up on Amory's Game Object Model (GOM) this weekend, I've churned over the idea of using the GOM as a framework for lesson plans. Structuring a lesson plan around the GOM model still allows for the inclusion of traditional content like objective and sequence, but it stress the outer shell of the GOM - Game Space. Framing a traditional information literacy session within the GOM should force the analysis and implantation of play elements and video game strategies... Or at least that is the theory I'm working from.

Below is the previously posted Fantasy Football lesson laid out using the GOM. I plan on running other lessons through the GOM as well and would appreciate any feedback or questions.

Fantasy Football GOM

• 1) Game Space
• Play: Fantasy football content and play is a recreation choice of about 18 million Americans (source: Fantasy Sports Trade Association, 2007)
  
• Exploration: Freedom of resource path and choice, not 1 right path source
• Challenge: Not clear answer for #3, no consensus of opinion
• Engagement: topic of invest, student directed outcome, inclusion of student voting
• Visualization Space
• Critical Thinking: ACRL outcomes
• Discovery: searching and collection of data
• Goal Formation: research question, #3 draft pick
• Goal Completion: voting on draft choice, reaching decision
• Competition: OT activity is organized, 2 min drill is informal, “who’s source is best?”
• Practice: 2 min drill is in class practice, discussion allows reflection on that practice
• Storyline: context of students making a draft choice in their own league
• Elements Space
• Fun: hopefully the content of entertainment is interesting and even fun
• Graphics: limited visual component, graphs through voting
• Sounds: no sounds incorporated, could use Fox Sports NFL and ESPN theme songs/intro music
• Technology: limited use, mainly computers and internet access to perform research
• Actors Space
• Drama: librarian created dram of “who to pick” limited role
• Interaction: student/librarian engagement, students interact with each other debating who is the best pick
• Gestures: librarian movement throughout classroom to assist in engagement and student classroom management
• Problem Space
• Communication
• Reading: content analysis of research/fantasy football findings
• Writing: recording of website, date, author, and player ranking
• Speaking: classroom discussion on findings, peer communication on ranking
• Literacy
• Visual: ability to read and understand charts and tables included in rankings
• Logical: ACRL outcomes
• Mathematical: season stat analysis to predict and judge performance
• Computational: averaging draft ranking to determine new value, weighted average of ranking based on source quality
• Memory
• Short-term: website evaluation
• Long-term: application of criteria and process to academic work
• Motor
• Manipulation: physical navigation of websites
• Reflex: no direct application

Source: Amory, A. (2007). Game object model version II: A theoretical framework for educational game development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(1):51-77.

It was a year ago today that my godson, Luke Stempa died.

Luke was a gift.

While I have few words to describe him right now, thanks to the tightening in my stomach. He is an inspiration for me and my work on this site. Because of Luke's physical conditions he was limited in sports, but much of Luke's identity, and learning came through his life as a gamer.

Here are posts about Luke and his continued influence in my life, one from a month after his death and another from this past spring. I know that he would love the work and discussions going on here.

My thoughts and prayers are with his family this day and everyday.

Luke, I love you and miss you. Thank you for the games we played, the lightsaber battles together, and the love we shared.

Since I included the following information literacy outcomes in the Objectives of the lesson plan. I want to provide specific examples throughout the lesson to help make the application and information literacy connection clear:

1.1.a. Confers with instructors and participates in class discussions, peer workgroups, and electronic discussions to identify a research topic, or other information need

Class discussion on who to pick, criteria to use, peer discussion on draft selection.

1.2.c. Identifies the value and differences of potential resources in a variety of formats (e.g., multimedia, database, website, data set, audio/visual, book)

Print magazines, websites, podcasts, radio shows, TV shows; what are the strengths/ weaknesses of each format?

1.2.d. Identifies the purpose and audience of potential resources (e.g., popular vs. scholarly, current vs. historical)

Is the audience of a fan site or discuss board different than ESPN or Fox sports- Discuss of audience & purpose individual sources.

1.2.f. Realizes that information may need to be constructed with raw data from primary sources

Use previous season statistics to help predict and draw conclusions

2.2.a. Develops a research plan appropriate to the investigative method

Plan of where to look and how to record the info (chart or spreadsheet to record rankings) 10 pre-searched sites.

2.2.b. Identifies keywords, synonyms and related terms for the information needed

List out search terms, really, determine terms before search.

2.4.a. Assesses the quantity, quality, and relevance of the search results to determine whether alternative information retrieval systems or investigative method should be utilized

Students report out if they went directly to a site or did a general search, and the results of search

2.5.d. Records all pertinent citation information for future reference

Students write down, copy & paste, or bookmark site to record source, date published, and author.

3.2.a. Examines and compares information from various sources in order to evaluate reliability, validity, accuracy, authority, timeliness, and point of view or bias

Define criteria on the board, both students & librarian contribute- Use class discussion of criteria after each source to make judgments

3.2.c. Recognizes prejudice, deception, or manipulation

During the reporting out process, The librarian helps the class ID potential prejudice from site or compared to info on other sites.

3.4.a. Determines whether information satisfies the research or other information need

After reporting process, students determine if they want more info (if time allows use OT activity if search not satisfied.

3.4.c. Draws conclusion based upon information gathered

Vote as class to make draft pick, conclusion based on findings

3.4.f. Integrates new information with previous information or knowledge

Use initial draft voting & the results of research to draw conclusion, if results are different in ending vote compared to initial vote- discussion reasons for change.

3.6.a. Participates in classroom and other discussions

Discuss through questions & research reporting.

5.1.b. Identifies and discusses issues related to free vs. fee-based access to information

Through the results of search/ students will find areas not able to access free : CBS sports line, Fox sports Login Required: yahoo! Fee: ESPN

This Friday our information literacy program will be doing an orientation session for 70 incoming freshmen football players. Here is the draft of the lesson, feedback or comments are welcome.

Topic: Information Literacy Skills in Fantasy Football
ACRL Information Literacy Learning Objectives:
1.1.a. Participates in class discussions
1.2.c. Identifies the value and differences of potential resources in a variety of formats (print vs. online)
1.2.f. Construct information with raw data from primary sources

2.2.b. Identify keywords, synonyms and related terms for the information needed
2.4.a. Assess the quantity, quality, and relevance of the search results to determine whether alternative methods should be utilized
2.5.d. Record all pertinent citation information

3.2.a. Examine and compare information from various sources in order to evaluate reliability, validity, accuracy, authority, timeliness, and point of view or bias
3.2.c. Recognize prejudice within information
3.4.a. Determine whether information satisfies the research or if additional information need
3.4.c. Draw conclusions based upon information gathered
3.4.f. Integrate new information with previous information or knowledge
3.6.a. Participate in classroom and other discussions

5.1.b. Identify and discuss issues related to free vs. fee-based access to information

Required Knowledge:
Basic understanding of football positions, detailed understanding of terminology and strategies not required.

Materials Needed:
Computer lab with internet access (lesson could be modified to teach off line with handouts)

Sequence of Instruction:
1.) Introduce the session and determine class's experience or awareness of fantasy football
(How many played Fantasy Football?)
2) Establish creditability either through sharing experience or through research skills
(I may not have a lot of experience, but I can tell you who’s a better value in the latter rounds or what sleepers to look out for, because fantasy football is all about in depth research.)
3) Provide a sample research question: Will the Madden curse strike again? Titans QB Vince Young is ranked anywhere from #6 - #14 at the QB position.
4) Begin the discussion on how to determine who to pick, when to pick them, and who to start, all questions answered through research.
5) Research Question: "Who should be the #3 overall pick in the draft?”
(#1 overall is LT, and while there is discussion on #2, there are more possibilities for the #3 pick. Thus, there is a research need.)
6) Use Turning Point clickers to vote on who should be selected
(F.Gore, S.Jackson, L.Johnson, J.Addai)
7) Class discussion on what they would use to make the decision of the #3 pick. Write student responses on board/ppt/or other means of recording.
8) Built off the student list to define how students' determine the quality of a source (record answers) (Reliability, validity, accuracy, timeless, and authority)
9) With the criteria defined, the class needs to determine where they would look for this information (print magazines, online, friends).
10) 2:00 minute drill - students get 2 minutes of individual work time to find and record their answers to the research question. They need to keep the sites up on their screens or write down the information in order to report back to the class as a whole.
11) Class Discussion: Report out- what did they find?

• Where? Evaluate against criteria
• Does it match the criteria?
• Can we answer the research question based on this information?
• Why / why not?
• What information do we still need?

12) Evaluate results together as a class:

• Evaluate results
• ID gaps
• Revise search strategies

13) Include additional rankings (done during prep time) to address any missing criteria and add more data to draw a conclusion from
If time permits, if not jump to 16
14) OT Activity: split the students in the room, creating 2 sides; each side provides an additional reference for the research question; references continue back and forth until one side "out scores" the other by having a source when the other side doesn't or by having a source that is "worth more" (higher quality) than the other side; example: source is more authoritative, timely, or meets the criteria more than the other reference source
15) Review results from OT activity and draw appropriate conclusions as a class, based on the research question.
16) Re-vote using Turning Point or same method from the beginning of the lesson to answer the research question
17) Build the Bridge

• Highlight Criteria Used
• Discuss Criteria's Relationship to Academic Research
• Stress Student's Ability to Already Do These Skills in Fantasy Football
• Emphasis the Importance to Use These Skills in Their College Assignments

Evaluation Procedures:
- Classroom vote (via Turning Point clickers) deciding on what player for each pick
- Online survey assessment including quantitative questions based on objective and qualitative questions on applications and perceptions.

The newest issue of Innovate is out. There are two articles that deal with learning, video games, education:

In this article, Joey J. Lee and Christopher M. Hoadley argue that not enough attention has been given to video games' role in identity development and exploration, important corequisites for learning. This oversight has resulted in the failure of many attempts at edutainment, in spite of the acknowledged potential of video games to engage students in meaningful learning.

The article studied two middle school classes and how through the use of MMOGs the students engaged with diversity and technology issues. I am looking forward to reading this to see the development of an online identity and how that virtual identity shaped and changed the students' physical interactions.

The second article:

Amory, A. (2007). Game object model version II: A theoretical framework for educational game development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(1):51-77.

The Game Object Model (GOM) explores the concept that educational games should be: relevant, explorative, emotive, engaging, and include complex challenges - all with authentic learning activities.

While the core of a game's learning process comes from the puzzles and quests within the game, their needs to be reflection and discussion about the process and the knowledge gained through play. I read Amory’s article on the flight to GLLS 2007, but I sat on it thinking of applications for libraries using video games and gamed based strategies. Before discussing the changes with version two, it is useful for a discussion of the first GOM developed by Amory in 1999.

Components of the first GOM:

• Game Space - Play, Exploration, Challenges, Engagement
• These are the core elements of a game identified by both game designers and game-based researchers. Games, both commercial and educational, use these to keep the player moving through the game. These components are not only important to maintain the interest of a player, they are important in maintaining the interest of our students as well. I experienced the success of creating these "game spaces" within traditional information literacy sessions. Using videogames in education and information literacy provides a wide variety of options to create these "game spaces." We should be planning and working to incorporate these elements within our classrooms.
• Visualization Space - Critical thinking, discovery, goal formation, goal completion, competition, Practice, story-line
• The visualization of the game addresses the physical and emotion experience the player goes through during the game. Most of these components are rooted in traditional educational theory. Creating (forming) goals, developing a process to reach them, completing them is standard for many process based issues (this includes the ACRL Information Competency Standards). I've briefly addressed critical thinking theory and video games before here and here. The success of competition within education is a mixed bag of blessings and curses that depends on a variety of factors (including the nature of participants and the result of the competition). The opportunities for successful practice is integrated in almost any lesson (whether written, oral of physical) the need to practice these skills to develop them is evident.
• Elements Space - Fun, graphics, sounds, technology
• Here are the gameplay elements within the GOM. How does the game play? Is it fun? Do the graphics engage the user? Do the graphics represent realism or are they stylized? Do the sounds help create an engaging experience or do they pull the player out of the game. Is the technology a help or hindrance for the player? These same questions can be raised in our lesson planning as well as in game-based learning. Are we incorporating fun, Engaging (yet not distracting) graphics, sounds that complement the experience, and technology for the benefit of our students (not just technology for technology's sake)? These elements can be implemented in a variety of setting (game-based and traditional) and see the benefits.
• Actors Space - Drama, interaction, gestures
• The physical actions and reactions of the players and students involved. How are students interacting with each other during gameplay and the lesson? Depending upon the physical demands of video game system, the way a player interacts with the game allows for additional requirements in this category.
• Problem Space
• Communications - Reading, writing, speaking
• Communication in some form is required in every classroom interaction. Communication, successful communication, happens often in a game without the player thinking about it. Reading, writing, and oral communication are important for both the success of a game and traditional lessons. This communication is not simply between player and game, but student and teacher and student to student peer relationships as well.
• Literacy - Visual, Logical, mathematical, computational
• Here is where many traditional educational skills & standards (libraries, education, subject discipline) would be inserted into the GOM.
• Memory - Short-term, Long-term
• Some skill sets are intended and reinforced for success for game play and studying in the short team. There may be specific skills in the video game that are intended only for the short term (a new attack or item to reach a new location / enemy). Long-term memory needs prepare the player not only for a specific action, they the player to understand the game. Traditional lessons have similar requirements: short term retention for specifics staged assignments and tasks; long term retention for the content, facts, analysis of the subject specific discipline.
• Motor - Manipulation, Reflex
• Here are the physical movements required by the game and lesson. What actions and movements are required? A consideration to those with physical disabilities can be considered here.

The GOM provides a potential set of guidelines for developing educational games. The components of the GOM while designed for educational video games, may actually work for traditional lessons as well. This is an application I will come back to in future posts.

Next… I’ll look at the changes made to the GOM II.



I started this post on Thursday night, but since I fell asleeeeeeeeeeeeeeep at the computer 2 nights in a row, I decided to wait until later to complete it... for the benefit of all involved.

I suppose the title could have been "take the red pill" or " take the plunge" or whatever catch phrase you want to use. My point is that there are a lot of great and interesting things happening with videogames and academic libraries, and now is your chance to show it.

Amy Harris and Scott Rice from UNC Greensboro sent out a call for proposals for their upcoming ACRL publication: Casebook on Gaming in Academic Libraries. While I know this proposal went out about a week ago, I wanted to try to keep some attention on it:

From my experience at GLLS2007, there are a wide variety of librarians using and applying videogames in their libraries and instruction. While the presenters, Annie and Kristin and their info lit 3D game focused on immersion and experience; Bee and Tammy's Quarantined game (my notes from LOEX 07); and Amy and Scott themselves have excellent research and applications for their games - there is more out there.

You are doing more. So accept the mission. Take the side-quest. Submit your proposals and let us all know about the work that you are doing.


Photo via ALA GLLS 2007 set

Thank you for the Games, Learning, & Libraries Symposium last week. There are so many thank yous and compliments I want to share with those who organized the event.

Thank you Jenny.
And thank you to those I had the fortune to meet there as well. Thank you all.

The highest compliment I can give is that as a result of ideas generated from the symposium, I'm already integrating and planning the coming academic year with new videogames and videogame strategies in mind.

I've already written a number of posts about the sessions themselves and my reflections on them. And I intended to have a write up on my reflections and applications from James Paul Gee keynote at GLLS 2007, but my ideas continued to expand. The applications of Gee's 12 principles discussed at GLLS grew well beyond the length of parts I - IV of my Henry Jenkins' reflections.

Thus, starting next week, I am going to walkthrough each of Gee's 36 videogame and learning principles and discuss them in relation to information literacy & academic libraries. The intent of this 18 day long series is not to review Gee's principles out of "What Video Game have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy." That's what Gee's excellent book is for.

My goal is to provide library applications, including specific examples, to his principles. The discussion of these principles and their applications should provide interested libraries (or those energized by GLLS) a way to start modifying and "leveling-up" their information literacy programs for the coming year.

Thank you again Jenny. I'll just wrap up my discussions on GLLS 2007, with some photos of the open gaming night, via Flickr's ALA GLLS2007. The first picture is of Nemo betting me at DDR. The second is of Timothy Greig and I playing WarioWare Smooth Moves on the Wii. And finally, below, is a quick pick up Nintendo DS wi-fi match with the rhythm game Elite Beat Agents.

At Games, Learning, and Libraries Symposium last week, Dr. Henry Jenkins identified four sets of skills that students today need. Jenkins stated that, we as librarians and educators, can address these literacy skills. We can help supply these needs and deal with these problems through the following 11 skills:

• Play: Having the capacity to experiment and problem solve is at the core of research. Whenever I sit down to do a search, I’m experimenting with terms and strategies. I’m testing hypothesizes on where to look and what to look for. Searching is the scientific process. Testing the search hypothesis, analyzing the results, and drawing conclusions about how to search based on the results. If this searching process fits Jenkins’ explanation of play, why do our students see it as work? Why not emphasis this experimenting as play? Try it, doesn’t work, tinker and test, and then try again. Do students see searching as work because there is an assignment attached or because they have little motivational incentive test and play around? What if we make their initial searches cooperative or competitive? I am teaching a research writing library session on the second day of class this fall. The students have very little context for their geographic based research topics. I hope to tap into this concept by structuring their initial searches as a playful experiment, where we don’t know the right answers but digging around for topics (good or bad topics) gives us a place to start.
• Simulation: If we want to structure some of our sessions a playful experimenting, we still want students to interpret dynamic models of real world processes and understand the impacts of changing variables. This could be as basic as changing search parameters to see how the results react. But it could be carried out through giving students real world research questions and having them make decisions and draw conclusions based on them, making sure to include time for reflection and discussion.

Project NML helped develop the withpaper on these problems and potential solutions; resources available at projectnml.org

Due to the length of my final reflections, I've split them into 4 sections

At Games, Learning, and Libraries Symposium last week, Dr. Henry Jenkins identified four sets of skills that students today need. Jenkins stated that, we as librarians and educators, can address these literacy skills. We can help supply these needs and deal with these problems through the following 11 skills:

• Performance: The idea of “simulation” ties nicely into Jenkins’ description of performance. We can create situations where our students are not simply just spitting back facts or grabbing quotes from sources as the extent of their application. Regardless if our sessions are one-shots or multiple times, we, as librarians, have the ability to create a learning environment that asks our students to step in and assume a different role (often a fictional one). This role-playing can create more engaging experience for the student and give us a chance to explain how the literacy skills we teach play out in the world outside our educational establishments.
• Appropriation: Now if Jenkins’ describes this skill as the ability to meaningfully sample and remix media content, do we see this as the perfect spot to drag out our plagiarism and copyright content and lesions? Don’t our students sample and remix content for almost every research based assignment? If so, the question is do they do it meaningfully? I would safely assume that every educator can think of examples on both sides of this argument. Part of the students ability to meaningfully mix content when trying to inform their peers comes from the need to show support for their argument. Many of our students’ are media literate enough to know that they should question material (whether or not they do is another discussion). I was talking with a student today that didn’t believe 9/11 happened as reported because he couldn’t see all the evidence to support it. The connection is easy – if they don’t trust someone else’s information without sources and support, why should someone trust them?
• Multitasking: I’m guilty of not trusting this. We use software in our teaching lab to lock down the student computers. While our staff mainly use it to improve our pedagogy by involving the students more, we have all slipped into the idea of “locking” down their computers and pushing out our content. All in the hopes that they will not be distracted. What I realized last spring is that pushing it out is all the more distracting. Not allowing the students to multitask actually made them pay less attention. While multitasking the needed to stay cognitively engaged in both their own work and the content from the class in order to keep up. So while some students may seem distracted, their ability to scan the classroom and screen and focus onto salient details is an asset not a drawback. Our job is to play to this multitasking, encourage it, and have it meaningfully shape the session. The student multitasking while I’m speaking could be directed to seek out additional facts about the topic and then share those findings with the class.

Due to the length of my final reflections, I've split them into 4 sections

At Games, Learning, and Libraries Symposium last week, Dr. Henry Jenkins identified four sets of skills that students today need. Jenkins stated that, we as librarians and educators, can address these literacy skills. We can help supply these needs and deal with these problems through the following 11 skills:

• Distributed Cognition: Videogames are tools that we, as players, interact with to expand our mental capacities. Granted players may not sit down to play with that goal, but the result of playing and learning still nets that result. Now how do we translate that to our classrooms? William Shaffer's epistemic games seek to teach some of this meaning. Our educational institutions are intended and hopefully designed to create this meaning and expand students’ mental capacities. But because of the lack of some of these former skills (play, performance) our students are not invested or engaged enough to reach this outcome.
• Collective Intelligence: Knowledge and learning is not (and should not be) an isolated process. The ability for our students to pool their knowledge and compare notes with each other to reach a common goal should not be discouraged. Players working cooperatively either in person or online pool their resources and knowledge to succeed. Students working together can do the same, whether in class or online through social software. Educators promoted and advocated this group learning atmosphere for years, but as I mentioned before this meaning should be positioned beyond the students’ assignments. Connecting students to a larger world and showing their worth in that world is important in cultivating that strength of collective intelligence.
• Judgment = ACRL definition of Information Literacy (find, evaluate, & use)

Due to the length of my final reflections, I've split them into 4 sections

At Games, Learning, and Libraries Symposium last week, Dr. Henry Jenkins identified four sets of skills that students today need:

• traditional print literacy
• research skills / information literacy
• technical skills
• media literacy

Jenkins stated that, we as librarians and educators, can address these literacy skills. We can help supply these needs and deal with these problems through the following 11 skills:

• Transmedia Navigation: For Jenkins this is the ability to deal with flow of stories and information across multiple modalities. Can we as educators use these multiple modalities through cross-curricular assignments and research? We need to find ways to take our assignments beyond their classroom context and apply them and the knowledge they bring elsewhere. Our students are prepared to do this, are we?
• Networking: On its’ surface networking includes the information literacy skills of searching, synthesizing, and disseminating information. But taken to a deeper level (as Jenkins’ example of the internet community’s mapping of Lost’s Darma Project), this synthesis and sharing of information expands well beyond our classrooms. It includes connecting our students with our faculty and helping them share information. It includes connecting our students to researchers in the field or topic of their study/assignment. It includes tapping into a larger community of learners, students, advocates, and researchers for our students to not only see the meaning of their work, but for their work to contribute meaning to others.
• Negotiation: Tapping in and taking part in the networking described above helps our students enter into diverse communities. The next step is to help them navigate those communities by respecting multiple and not just respecting diversity but valuing it. While our might often act as they are in control and in charge, placing them into a larger learning community may put them in a minority (age) and help them understand the need to value diversity opinions, regardless of race, age, gender, or experience.

Project NML helped develop the withpaper on these problems and potential solutions; resources available at projectnml.org

Edit: Sorry if a shortened version of this post hit your RSS reader... my error in mixing Blogger shortcut keys

The concept of Participatory Culture that Jenkins describes helps strengthen critical media consumption and creation:

• Low barriers to expression and engagement: not having a penalty (whether real or imagined) for expressing answers – both the right & wrong answers; these barriers in our classrooms need to be implicit and explicit, our students need to feel comfortable and welcome to engage but we need to be clear that those expressions will not only be welcomed, but encouraged; as librarians and educators we inherently know this, but do our students?
• Kind of informal mentorship: Can we create these between librarians, tutors, and peers? In a class by class setup, these informal mentorships can be constructed. But maintaining them over the length of a semester is more of a challenge. This is where the application of social software strengthens the mentoring roles. Students do not need to physically interact with their mentor in order to gain the benefits of the relationship. The challenge I see here is finding ways for students to want to engage in these relationships. Do not limit the potential mentors to those only on your campuses. I want to try this mentorship with an upper division class, by having my students email the author/faculty member from one of their research articles. This could provide them with an opportunity to expand their understanding of the material and also feel that…
• Members feel that contributions matter: I hope we are already making our students feel this way in our classrooms. But this concept is larger than the classroom. The concept means that our students’ contributions are applied to a larger whole, the campus, discipline, or the general internet. Is anyone having their students edit Wikipedia pages? At LOEX this May, one librarian was discussing making editing & improving or creating a Wikipedia page as an assignment.
  
• Degree of social connection between members: How often do we take a social connection for granted because of the natural dynamics of schools and colleges? Many of the recent web 2.0 applications libraries are using attempt to maintain this interaction and connection outside of the classroom.
  

Tomorrow, I'll finish my reflections on Jenkins' keynote looking at the 11 ways that Jenkins suggested that we can help close the various literacy skills our students need.

Since I've spent the last few early morning hours awake (thanks to a potty training 2 year old) digging through my RSS feeds, I wanted to point out a few relevant news items.

If you noticed my post from last night, I started treated "video games" as a single word "videogame." This change is due to the publication of The Videogame Style Guide and Reference Manual by David Thomas, Kyle Orland, and Scott Steinberg. As a librarian, or anyone interested or writing about gaming, I see no reason that we should not use the discipline specific terms. And so the style guide, which you can download here, defines the term "videogame" as:

Catch-all term for any type of interactive entertainment software. Always write as one word - p.65

In addition to this useful download, John Rice over at Educational Games Blog discovered a link to download the serious game Revolution created by MIT's Education Arcade. I've mentioned Revolution before when I interviewed one of it's initial creators, Matthew Weise. And Henry Jenkins used it as an example in the ALA GLLS 2007 keynote speech. I have not tried it yet, but since it is a mod, it does require you to have Never Winter Nights installed. I'm looking for to trying it out.

Over at OUseful Info, they posted about looking at course layout and design from a game design strategy. Well designed courses include progression and/or emergence in gameplay (one word, thanks style guide). Our lessons plans tend to follow this same pattern?

Which style, progression or emergence, do your information literacy sessions take?

I'd like to say that I was able to take a little break and relax after getting back from Chicago and but that hasn't been the case. I the ALA Tech Source Symposium,came back home to a sick wife and a week full of strategic planning meetings. While the meetings were productive and my wife is healthy, everything added up to a busy week that challenged me to hold on to the momentum of GLLS.

The Symposium itself was great and I throughly enjoyed the sessions and conversations each day. I'm thankful for the discussions I was able to have with people I've only traded emails with, and I feel fortunate to have made a handful of new contacts. I look forward to how everyone's projects work out over the coming year. There are a lot of exciting projects in the works and I hope that I'll be able to highlight some of them soon. It is great to see academic librarians approach videogames and information literacy from all different angles.

The more I talked with people at GLLS, the more I realized that what I started in our information literacy program last year was more than just tacking on gaming strategies to our sessions. What we have started at the University of Dubuque is a complete revision of our information literacy program through the lens of videogame strategies and game-based learning.

I will come back to this idea over the next couple of weeks as I develop it and share what this revision means in terms of teaching strategies, pedagogy, and ACRL standards. But before I begin that discussion, I want to reflect and analyze Henry Jenkins' and James Paul Gee's keynote speeches. I'll be back tomorrow with my thoughts and applications from Jenkins' keynote at GLLS.

Boring Stock photo from Salopek Consulting Ltd.

Games Without Borders: Gaming Beyond Consoles and Screens
Elizabeth (Liz) Lawley, Director of RIT Lab for Social Technology;
Visiting Researcher, Microsoft Research
Liz's personal blog: mamamusings
Liz also blogs for Terra Nova as well.

She talks a little more about Big Games as being pervasive and breaking down boundaries. She states that the physical spaces are still important and play a role. Shopping in physical spaces and experiences are still important. This is still true for library's as well, there is still meaning and relevance within the space.

"Passively Multiplayer Online Games" embed playfulness into standard and even boring activities. Chore Wars is another example that adds competition to standard activities.

Hold Yu-Gi-Oh tournaments at libraries, we can create those gathering spaces and take advantage of these spaces as community / social interaction.

Liz described some stories about her experiences with her kids and World of Warcraft. They took off limits on gaming and TV and the kids self regulated. Her youngest understood detailed economic content (supply and demand) and ethical lessons through World of Warcraft. Lane Lawley's (Liz's oldest son) is leading the way on civil and social interactions in Teen Second Life. Lane even presented at GLS 2007 about his experiences. Liz made the point that there needs to be places to gain these experiences = libraries.

Gameguides and game artbooks for libraries. She asks the question of "why don't we" include them in library collections?

Liz raised the question about why are we (educators and librarians) not creating "best video game guides?" Why leave it commercial sites or worse, not do it at all. There is not a specific resource for all this information. Without these resources of positive examples of games, parents are left with traditionally negative media coverage of video games.
Who can create guides for librarians, educators, and parents. We can do workshops in libraries and schools and explain the benefits of video games. To be effective in this, Liz argues, that we need to tell stories, not stats.

As an educator and parent, I love the idea of a "Best Video Games for Kids" list. Andrew Bub's Gamerdad does a great job of presenting games in a positive light, but provides parents with the information about the game to make choices. I hope that my current work with GamerDad, on a similar project will help address so of this desire for positive gaming content and parental awareness, so stayed tuned to.

glls2007

Big Fun, Big Learning: Transforming the World Through Play

by Greg Trefry, Come Out and Play Festival, organizer; Game designer for GameLab,

Greg’s focus for his Tuesday keynote was on “Big Games” which are similar to scavenger hunts and other traditional games throughout a city. Big Games treat a city (neighborhood, city, entire internet can be the environment) as a game board.

Big Games break the “magic circle,” they are integrated with the real whole not just that “magic” gamin space. The story within Big Games add a layer of narrative onto everyday experiences. Moving through the city is different because of the game context; it’s about who’s playing, who’s not, who’s tracking you.

Big Games while they can be large in scope, they also include a strong local element because people are all interacting in a shared space. Technology can play a role in these games in order to track these local players over big spaces, but other games just use traditional paper or chalk to mark goals and places.

There is an element of spectacle with the games, since the world around watches and begins to engage in the players. The audience is part of the game. Games often incorporate team dynamics and learning, which result in developing and implementing strategies to succeed.

Big Games fit well on college campuses. Are your students doing any right now?

Big Games are similar to sports. While there is team competition, the game is about the public spectacle and the interaction with the spectators. Big Games not only include the players but everyone passing by or stopping to watch. This type of environment creates a real potential for social experimentation. Some Big Games are tapping into this, ie. a giant pillow fight in a public square in Toronto – they set out pillows and waited to see what would happen.

Pac-Manhattan, where individuals play Pac-Man in Washington square in NY is another successful Big Game. Big Urban Game (BUG) came out of the Design Institute of Minneapolis and it successfully engaged the public and media. “The Beast” (a promotional Big Game for Spielberg’s A.L. movie) was an online Big Game through a variety of faked websites with buried clues throughout. Working collaboratively across the internet, players worked through 6 months worth of content in 3 days. I Love Bees, by Jane McGonigal, is another great example of how the internet was used collaboratively to complete the game.

“Journey to the End of the Night” a simple, yet successful, Big Game from last year’s Come Out & Play. Really works like a big game of zombie tag, where once tagged they join the chasers in tracking down the rest of the players. The game lasted for over 3 hours.

Big Games are successful often because of how they re-envision traditional spaces. They transform our common spaces into a new, challenging, and tense world. There are a wide variety of Big Games, all of which work to find ways to see our daily surroundings as a game. The barrier to entry is minimal. There is not any experience required and they have the potential to engage students, staff and faculty all in a shared experience.

For Greg, Big Games are all about being “there” and experiencing a physical space and then finding the content from that space to create an experience. Greg provided a list of assets that libraries have for Big Games:

• locations(game boards, movement, “where to hide stuff”)
  
• collections(items to collect)
  
• spaces(territory to hold)
  
• content(existing symbols, materials equipment to interact with)
  
• persistence(library card identities, leveling up abilities, small incentives to gain new status)
  
• unique identifiers(knowing players reached a goal, call numbers)
  
• referees(need people to keep track of status and players)
  
• tools(computers, copiers, use to track and solve puzzles)
  
• display(ability to provide updates on game, state of the game, who’s winning)
• Refreshments(lots of running=water)

Greg provided 5 potential ideas for Big Games in libraries:

Scavenger Hunts; either with books or people, the game would require players to avoid detection which gets players to be mindful and aware of spaces, players could collect codes like call numbers or book contents or titles, use the codes to help solve the mystery, this type of experience provides avenues for players to level-up

Then & Now; citywide or campus wide photo hunt, use old photos to have players find the current locations, this could be a great homecoming type of event that could even involve alumni

Real Estate Games; controlling spaces, collecting buildings around campus or collections in the library

Alternative Reality Games; hidden clues with content to solve mystery, could promote collaboration from students

Code Breaking Games; foreign language or even subject / discipline specific language

Collection Games; using call numbers to generate creatures or items that could be collected, traded and used, library website could be used to list the creatures/items with the codes that correspond

Initial Steps: Look around at the world – Give normal activities goals, Simple ways to track moves, Playtest and playtest again to work bugs

www.iamtheeconomy.com

glls2007

Why Serious Games Shouldn't Be Taken Seriously
- Thom Kevin Gillespie from Indiana University

"Serious games are silly things"

A kid diagnosed with a reading disability was reading text in a game and the game's thick manual. Another great example of gaming supporting and help children learn to read. This anecdote was one of many that Gillespie provided during the first 25 minutes of his presentation, during a story that traces his career. All the examples that he provided focuses on students and kids creating media and creating content.

MIME Program: Master's in Immersive Media Environments

The program brings it's students to Gillespie's home for gaming (board & video game) events in order to authentic experiences. They start the design process free of computers. This has freed up their creative process. The students create a 10 page pitch and try to attract other students for their team project. The program includes both undergrad and grad students into the pitch and creation process. The process takes up to 3 years to complete the game once the project excepted.

Gillespie has worked with inner city "gang rescue" programs. The students failed at traditional schools, but succeed in creating game design. "I would have taken some of these 15 year old kids into my graduate program if I could have."

What libraries can do:

• Free game lab, there are a variety of resources including scratch, blender.org, gimp.org, alice.org, squeak.org and others all open source programs; students may start with board games

Develop a game called "Clean It," designed a board game that shows a positive and necessary role of janitors. It was initially conceptualized to help a janitor provide his kids with a positive image of their father.

Gillespie's big take away is that anyone can create games (both board and video games) and tap your communities and let them be creative. Oh, and that Second Life will fail.

EDIT (again): His summary on the program really didn't fit with what he actually presented was nothing like his presentation. While his message was okay, it was hard to pull out. Unfortunately there was not much to take away. Anyone looking for information about Serious Games will be better served visiting Persuasive Games, Water Cooler Games, and Games for Change .


glls2007

Games Students Play: A New Approach to Online Information Literacy Instruction

University of North Carolina: Greensboro; Scott Rice & Amy Harris

Focused on trying to get students into the library, about 14,000 FTE

First build an online tutorial in 2000. 2006 knew there needed to be a next step.

They established a need: a desire to reach 1st year students
Collaboration: Scott's concept of making a game & making it open for others
Determining Market: objectives in 1st year instruction lent themselves to gameplay

Board Game Format, it is free online through their blog
Categories:

• Wildcard,
  
• Choice Your Resource,
  
• Cite Your Sources,
  
• Searching & Database Use
  
• Special spaces with live web links for real time finding and assessing

There is a time clock for each question

The game was created with AJAX software. In order to make it easily scalable, it is as simple as possible. Also wanted it to meet ADA requirements, including both visual and audio cues, both mouse and keyboard short cuts. All the avatar images are from an online comic that opened up their images to creative commons.

Rollout:

• Fall 2007 (this allowed for more usability testing and prep time)
  
• Marketed to first-year instructors
• Marketed directly to students through Facebook, library site, and Blackboard
  
• Contest

The Future of the Game:

• "Express" version for in-class assessment
• Targeted versions for upper level classes, targeted to subjects or databases
• Other versions for non-library or non-higher education
• Generic Version for easier adaption
• Versions with different citation styles that fit their discipline

They have not rolled the game out yet, and I am very curious about how the students will react. Stayed tuned to their blog... Scott is also working on reworking the entire tutorial to incorporate more gaming elements and mini games. Here's Scott's initial discussion of these changes.

While the game is intentionally not complex or involving it is a great entry point for librarians looking to get started with games in information literacy. The questions and format are ones that librarians are used to and potentially more comfortable with. The simplicity of the game works for one-shot sessions. This low barrier to entry is a great jumping off point for librarians.

The best thing I can say is go play it... download it for free from their site here
or test it out online


glls2007