Title:

  Mission US:  A Revolutionary Way to Learn History

·        http://www.mission-us.org/

General Information: 

Mission US is a role-playing game set in pre-revolution Boston.  Player takes on the role of Nat Wheeler, a 14-yearold, who leaves his family farm to become an apprentice printer.  As the apprentice, he is asked to complete tasks for the apprentice (Who is a Patriot) and his wife.  Some of the characters are fictional and some are based on real people in history.  Nat interacts with these characters in order to complete the missions is asked to complete.

Analysis Based on Flow Theory:

Before beginning my analysis, I watched the following 18-minute video :  http://www.ted.com/talks/mihaly_csikszentmihalyi_on_flow.html

If you are interesting in learning more about flow theory, Csikszentmihalyi is a great storyteller and made the concept of flow much clearer for me.

MISSION US

·        Task that the learners can complete-Mission US is a task that EVEN I could complete.  The game is divided into separate manageable missions that can be completed by the player.  For example, the first mission requires Nat to sell 3 advertisements for the Gazette.  He must go find people in need of this service and only sell to people who are Patriots along the way.  There are obstacles along the way conversations Nat has with the characters provides him with the needed information to complete the mission.  This game also allows you to save what you have completed and return to it at a later time.

·        Ability to concentrate on task-Player is able to stay focused without being overwhelmed by the information.  The map of the house and the map of the city are simplified so that the player isn’t distracted by details that aren’t critical in the missions.  It is easy to concentrate because you only have to scenes to consider:  the home and the city.  There is also a map of the farm he left but that isn’t as important in the mission. 

·        Task has clear goals:  At the beginning of each mission, the printer or his wife, for example, explain the mission.  Icons are then put at the top of the screen to remind you of the items you need to collect.  Warnings are given to you that can help you avoid situations that won’t help you complete the task.  Each mission also begins with some background information concerning the context in which Nat’s mission is set.

·        Task provides immediate feedback:  When Nat encounters a character, the character asks Nat a question.  Nat is given a choice of ways to respond to that character.  Once the response is given, the character responds based on Nat’s answer.  Nat is however, allowed to make mistakes that he learns about at a later time.  For example, I had Nat sell an advertisement to someone he shouldn’t have (A supporter of the King).  I didn’t really learn that I made Nat make a mistake until I took them back to my/his boss.  In this case, though, I think it’s quite appropriate that the response not be immediate.  I had to go back and tell her I couldn’t sell to her and learned something that I easily remembered.

·        Deep but effortless involvement:  Mission US provided deep but effortless involvement.  I become so involved in solving the mission (FLOW).  So many of the other games we have played in this class were more complicated for my game-playing ability.  I didn’t have time to complete all of the missions at once because of my schedule, but found myself making time for the game. (Something I just don’t do). 

·        Exercising a sense of control over their action-I was able to use my background knowledge and reading skills to control Nat’s actions in the game.  (I thought this game was really exceptional for helping kids know how they should respond to questions.  This was easy for me but could be a useful way for students to critically look at replies).  Another way to exercising control is that you could always go back and get more information before making a decision.  I never felt pressured to make a decision I wasn’t ready to make.

·        Concern for self disappears during flow-Guilty as charged.  I noticed that in my response I have gone from saying “the player” to “Nat” to “I.”  As an English paper I should go back and change this.  But I think it is indicative that I really did disappear into the game.  I began to think as Nat would have being a 14-year-old apprentice in Boston.  I totally would have been a Patriot while getting a better sense as to why not everyone shared those same views. 

·        Sense of duration of time is altered-I am such a strange person.  Once I knew I really enjoyed this game, I set the timer on the stove and only let myself play for 15 minutes at a time.  I would go do a task around the house and then set the timer for another 15 minutes.  So, I am only speculating that my sense of time would have been altered since I set time limits for myself.

Title:  Traditional versus Digital Backgammon

General Information: 

Backgammon is a board game that incorporates strategy and chance.  Backgammon is a 2-player game, putting players across from each other.  The board consists of 12 spaces on each side of the board.  Each player has 15 checkers that are placed in a particular starting position that is consistent.  The object of the game is for players to move their checkers around to their home area (the 6 spaces in front of them on opposing sides of the board.)  Players roll a pair of die to determine their movements.  (Doubles result in another turn).  Players try to move their checkers around to their home area while at the same time try to “hit” their opponent’s unprotected checkers (Any single checker on a space is unprotected).  A hit checker must be brought back into play when the opponent rolls a number that allows the checker to come back in on one of the 6 “home” spaces of the opponent who hit the checker.  When looking at your side of the board, your home spaces would be numbered 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.  If you can’t come in (2 checkers on the spaces, then you can’t play yet).  When all of your checkers are in the home area, you can begin taking them off according to numbers rolled.  The first person to remove all 15 checkers is the winner.

Comparison of Two Formats:  Digital vs. non-digital

Comparison 1:  Game Components

Previous Game Definition:  A game is an interactive, rule-dependent, representative,   activity in which players experience motivation, and obstacles along the way.  Games are dynamic and cause emotional responses.

Revised Game Definition:  A game is interactive, rule-dependent, representative,  motivating, and context-embedded.  Games are dynamic and obstacle-ridden.  Games evoke emotional responses and can be competitive or cooperative. 

Component	Traditional Backgammon	Digital Backgammon
Interactive	Yes (Stronger because of social interaction) If I had someone to play with, I would rather have someone to talk to while playing	Yes
Rule-Dependent	Yes	Yes (You can’t miscount on digital version.  Your checker simply won’t mover there)
Representative	Weak	Weak
Context-embedded	Weak	Weak
Motivation	Yes (Advantage is that you can play anytime.  The games go far faster when the computer is the other player)	Yes
Obstacles	Yes	Yes
Dynamic	Yes	Yes
Competitive/Cooperative              Competitive                                    Competitive

Comparison 2:  Interaction

Communication between/among players during the game play:

            I have played online backgammon before.  At the time I played online, I didn’t have anyone to play against.  I used it to fill some lonely times.  (Along with playing Yahtzee against myself---Wow!  Those were some dark days!)  I really think that I choose to play board games and card games because they are fun to play with family and friends.  You can have great conversations and have fun at the same time.  Losing a game of backgammon to the computer or beating the computer was not nearly as exciting/traumatic as playing with a friend.  I liken it to going out to dinner by myself.  I NEVER go out to dinner by myself because half of the reason I enjoy going out to dinner is the social aspect.

Cooperation between/among players:

            Both versions of backgammon require no cooperation.  I did enjoy the articles this week, however, that talked about cooperation using card games.  I particularly liked the study of Taiwanese students and vocabulary.  The poker-like game described was competitive and cooperative.  What I really liked about the game was that they had to describe the vocabulary word as they played.  The table that showed the score improvements was pretty exciting.  My always has so many words to memorize.  I am ready to have a vocabulary poker night at my house when the first test comes around this year.  (He already knows I am a nerd. He’s used to it)

Engagement to the games:

            The digital version does attempt to address the engagement issue.  You can choose your level which gives everyone a chance to be fairly engaged.  It also prompts you to play again right away by giving you a score.  It basically challenges you to give the computer another chance if you win, or challenges you to try again if you lose. 

            I find the traditional game engaging because it doesn’t require my full attention.  I can carry on a conversation while I play.  In addition, the game is generally a quick one.  You can pull the game out while dinner is in the oven or while you are waiting for someone to get ready. 

Motivation to play the games:

            There is motivation to play both games.  I still think that for me the traditional game is more motivating because of the personal connection with the other player.  If I am able to find time to play cards or a board game, I am going to want to play with someone.

Who Wants to Win a Million Dollars versus Bloxorz

Learner’s Style

1.       KOLB-Based on Kolb’s learning styles, MY learning style is Converging (Abstract Conceptualization and Active Experimentation) with a stronger emphasis on the AC portion of the combination.  From the descriptions provided in the Resources, I find myself ‘experimenting with new ideas, to simulate, and to do work with practical applications.’  One of the most exciting aspects of teaching is that it is constantly changing.  I don’t like getting ‘stuck’ in one situation, but rather appreciate the opportunities to try new things.

2.       PRENSKY-Prensky’s article made me reflect quite a bit this week.  On Prensky’s list, I find myself, on average to be around a 4.  If Prensky is correct in saying that ‘A good portion of today’s learners exhibit characteristics that approach ‘1’ in this scale,’ educators do need to consider this information.  “Engage Me or Enrage Me,” however goes a bit far.  I totally agree that we should engage learners.  In fact, many times I find far more time preparing engaging activities for students than the activities take themselves.  However, engagement doesn’t have to equal entertainment.  I, as an adult, must make myself do a multitude of things that are neither engaging or entertaining.  I learned as a child that the world didn’t revolve around me and my needs, but that I was a contributing part of a family.  I think we can do a disservice to a learner if they are allowed to be enraged about what is expected of them.  I think it is important to provide a balance for learners to help them learn to rise to any occasion.

3.       VAK-I enjoyed completing this particular VAK self-assessment.  I have taken and used assessments like this before,  but I thought these questions were far better than any I have seen.  I usually answer nearly every question with a V, but on this survey I had a bit more variety in answers.  (15 V, 9K, and 6A).  These results appear to give a better perspective of my learning style.  One is likely to find themselves more balanced than most of the surveys I have seen before.

ANALYSIS of GAMES

Best Fit:

http://edicatopm/jlb.org/million/index.html

Least Best Fit:

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/games/bloxorz

1.       General Information-In Who Wants to Win a Million Dollars?, players (the contestant) answers a series of science/math questions that get progressively more difficult.  (If you have seen the game show with a similar title, you already know how to play)  This imitation game has 3 life-lines like the television show as well.  In Bloxorz, the player must manipulate a rectangular prism, while not falling off an edge, until able to drop the prism through a hole in the oddly-shaped flooring.  This logic game is described as addictive, and IT WAS!  I was terrible and it doesn’t suit my learning style, but I have played it a lot.  I even asked my best friend and my son to play so I could watch and steal ideas from them. 

2.       Comparison 1-Game Components

My game definition which includes components:  A game is an interactive, rule-dependent, representative, activity in which players experience motivation, and obstacles along the way.  Games are dynamic and cause emotional responses.

In Who Wants to Win a Million Dollars?, the following game components could be considered strong:  rule-dependency, motivating, and obstacle-ridden.  For this game, the following components were less-evident:  interaction, dynamics, and representation.  For me, this game was far less interactive than the simulations from last week.  In addition, the game was not dynamic.  Although the questions changed and I was trying to answer the string of questions, I was really just answering knowledge-based questions.  Finally, I didn’t find the game to be representative.  I realize that it was supposed to be like the game show but I don’t think that was achieved.

In Bloxorz, the following components are strongly represented:  rule-dependent, motivating, emotional, and dynamic. A weaker component in this game is representation.  I never once felt like I was a part of something while playing this game.  I was simple moving that crazy prism around trying to get it into that hole.  I was just trying to use the little bit of logic I have.

From my vantage point, both games had similar strengths and weaknesses.  It is, however, the logic required by Bloxorz that makes it less suited for me.  Both games were motivating to me.  I spent a great deal of time playing Bloxorz because I was frustrated and really wanted to figure it out.  I don’t usually persist when faced with this type of challenge, so I give high marks to Bloxorz.  The Millionaire game was motivating to me because I knew I could do it, even if it took me a few tries and the Googling of a few answers.

3.       Comparison 2-Learning Styles

Who Wants to Win a Million Dollars? is the best fit for my Converging learning style.  Part of the description given in the Oncourse Resources states that  people with a Converging learning style can “solve problems and will use their learning to find solutions to practical problems.”  That describes me quite well.  If I couldn’t remember and answer or didn’t know an answer, I enjoyed trying to find out before I chose and lost all of my money.  This game provided me with some good review and the opportunity to learn some new information.

Bloxorz least fits my Converging learning style but I will need to explain further because that may not be apparent at first glance.  The reason this game doesn’t fit my learning style is because my thinking is far better when the thinking involves words and not pictures or spatial challenges.  I also don’t like to play games that require thinking ahead a great deal (I hate checkers and chess for that reason).  Bloxorz challenges me in areas where I have my greatest weaknesses.  I think Bloxorz would be better for someone with a Assimilating learning style.