Posted by: Al Meyers | March 30, 2009

Games And Education: How To Make It Work

Last week I was at the Game Developers Conference in San Francisco.  Unfortunately, this year I did not observe any “transformational” products coming out of the commercial video games industry.  That includes that much-hyped “OnLive” game streaming service that will be coming out in early 2010.  However, I did spend my time at the IGDA Games For Education Luncheon and interfaced quite a bit with members of academia who are stewarding various games design curricula at their higher ed programs.  I also noticed a very small, unpopulated area at the Sony Playstation booth called “Playstation-edu.”  Their handout was a brief teaser that states the following:

Playstation-edu will allow educational institutions to purchase development kits for either the PSP or the PS2 (or both).  The goal is to have them used in the classroom and for students to learn about the computer architectures behind game consoles.  The program is geared towards engineers and computer programmers.  We don’t provide an engine, so artists and designers won’t find it useful unless they are working directly with a programmer.  We are currently talking to TMs to elicit their interest in supplying engines.  We do provide all of the samples, demos, SDKs, SN compilers and debuggers that professional developers use.”

What does a business-side games executive like me make of this?  Absolutely NOTHING!  All this does is promulgate the issues we discussed at the luncheon.  These include the following:

  1. How do encourage women and minorities to consider a career in the games industry, including making games for education?
  2. What types of tactics can the commercial games industry undertake to strengthen the appeal of game-based learning in education?

There were other topics discussed, but the main issue I see is that in higher education, game development classes are at least 80/20 and sometimes as high as 90/10 male/female.  We need to foster partnerships between programmers and designers in the K-12 level, not at the higher education level.  Non-profit programs such as AMD’s Global Kids Digital Media Initiative are a good start.  However, the games industry needs to look at enrichment programs but most importantly, begin to fund game projects that appeal more broadly than the traditional core gamer.   One of the academics at my table had a great suggestion:  tap into the arts for potential game designers.  The arts is 75/25  female and has the creativity sorely needed in the commercial games industry.

We also need to get the games industry to stop using the term “Serious Games.”  I know this comes across as me being “Anti-Ben Sawyer,” but please do not take it that way.  Ben has done a great service in pioneering a movement around games as a utility beyond a purely entertainment experience.  However, the term “serious games,” to the non-gamer, means that the games are not “fun.”  What K-12 student would want to play a “serious game”?  For other sectors such as the military and health care, perhaps this term is appropriate.  But in education, the name just won’t work.  I know this is semantics, but unfortunately, semantics are important in a distribution channel long opposed to change, and for a long time unwilling and incapable of fundamental change.

I spoke to my friends/colleagues about giving “games for education” a keynote at a major games industry event, because I believe that the optics are finally at a point where this area of the industry is on the radar screen of key influencers in the education marketplace.  Teachers are demanding we bring 21st century technology products into the classroom, and they are demanding that we find a way to create fun, immersive game-based experiences to help connect with their students.

The time is now, folks.  Who’s brave enough to make the journey?

For a Friday post, I wanted to mix humor with some fantastic “forward-thinking.”  You will continue to see me refer to TED as a vehicle to challenge your conventional wisdom about our education system.  A friend reminded me of a TED Talk given by Sir Ken Robinson in 2006 about the need to bring creativity back into how we education our children.

When I listen to a talk, go to a conference, or even interview someone for a job, I will write down something in the event they offer a topic or a piece of critical thinking that I think is interesting or can have a profound effect on my career development or that of others.  Sir Ken said something very prophetic in this talk:  “If we are not prepared to be wrong, we won’t come up with anything original.”     He also cited a very, very accurate quote by Picasso about children and the disconnect between children and education:  “Every child is an artist.  The problem is how to remain an artist.”

On a Friday before the weekend, when thinking about the education stimulus bill and how we need to fundamentally alter our system and reorient it toward a 21st century society, I hope that the new Secretary of Education and other policy makers here and around the world would at least take 19 minutes and watch this talk.   Our children’s future may depend on it.

I recently became aware that there are now six states that have announced their committment to the “Tough Choices or Tough Times” reform agenda.  The article link is below.

Last week, Arizona, New Mexico and Delaware joined Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Utah in committing to implement recommendations of the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce.  The report offers a dramatic reform process for education, by adopting the kinds of powerful instructional systems used by the most successful countries for many years.    I quote the article by saying that these include

  • Recruiting teachers from the top third of college graduates and increasing their pay to make that possible
  • Revamping the high school-college transition
  • Reallocating education funding to high priority strategies for improving system performance
  • Pre-K for all
  • Putting more of our education funding behind students from low-income families
  • Changing the way schools are managed to give teachers more influence over the way schools are run, while holding them accountable for the results

I do not want to develop a reputation as being a naysayer or a pessimist, so let me say from the start that I applaud these states for taking a proactive approach and pledging to make a radical departure from the status quo.  Our country needs a “model state” that gets it right, and then the rest will surely follow.

On the side of skepticism, let me state that change MUST start with the pedagogy.  If I were to draw a series of concentric circles about the “circles of change” for education, the “bulls eye” would be the learning tools.  Everything starts with the learning methods.  All other tactics would come thereafter.  For example, Delaware is touting, “more rigorous and more frequent testing,” but if the skills being tested and the learning tools being used are flawed, then all you are saying is that you are testing more of the wrong things.

I’m all about “walking the walk,” so now that these six states have stepped out front on what may be one of the most critical issues of our time, I’m anxious to see what they do, not what they say.  Nonetheless, I wish them luck and hope they can be a shining example of how to successfully reinvent education in the 21st century.

Posted by: Al Meyers | March 17, 2009

The Coolest Invention I Have EVER Seen: From TED 2009

While I realize to all of you that this post may have very little to do with education innovation, I just had to blog about it.  I was one of the privileged few to attend TED 2009, and every year, TED showcases a product invention that is “jaw-dropping.”  This year was no different.

A few years ago, at the Forbes MEET Conference in Beverly Hills, I saw a demo of the Microsoft Surface.  Almost immediately, what I saw was not a future entertainment platform, but an early glimpse at the future student desk in the classroom environment.  Now, two years later, I have seen a derivative that takes the aspirations of of the Surface into the consumer mainstream.   I think this is one of the most disruptive innovative devices I have ever seen. Imagine what it could do not only for entertainment, but for experiential learning.

Take a look at this 8 minute video, and then tell me if you are not blown away.  Rest assured that the “packaging” will likely come later.

Posted by: Al Meyers | March 16, 2009

The Education Stimulus: An Outsider’s Perspective

On Friday, I listened to a webinar that discussed in detail the various components of the education stimulus plan.  The moderators discussed each area and the opportunities that were available in each of them.  They also discussed the timing of the funding, which included an immediate $44 Billion being made available to states in the next 30-45 days.  In theory, this all sounds like a windfall for school districts.  But as a long-time business strategist, I’d like to dig into the mechanics and underlying strategic premise of this stimulus bill.

After sitting through the webinar, I found the most interesting point to not  HOW the funds are to be spent, but WHEN they must be spent.  These funds must be spent within two years!  Unlike the NCLB funds, states and school districts must spend these with the concept of “short-term investment for long-term benefit.”  The moderators explicitly stated that “any ongoing license fees for educational technology projects would not pertain to this stimulus money, but NCLB money.”  That’s just not feasible, in my mind, and let me explain to you why.

What I inferred from this stimulus bill is that school districts are to assume that they’re going to make some quick, large investment and that will be the panacea for their ills.  Change does NOT happen that rapidly, especially in a mature industry, and education is no different.  It will take years of sustained investment and continued innovation for politicians and educators to determine whether our education system is heading in the right direction.  Innovation does not happen overnight, and I would be very skeptical if anyone actually believed that there is a quick fix to our problems.  Many education technology products are not a “buy once” pricing model, but typically are funded through either ongoing maintenance fees and/or license fees, as the products are typically renewed each year and in many cases there may be an annual surcharge for “product enhancements,” etc.  I think the education technology community deserves to better understand which products can access the stimulus funds and which cannot.

At the moment, I am in a quandary about this process, and based on what I heard on Friday, I continue to share the same skepticism that my colleagues in this “reinvent education” movement have about whether or not the stimulus will be allocated to the right solutions under a logical, effective implementation plan.  I read recently that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation believes that a large amount of their previous education grants were spent unwisely.  Lets not have the government have this happen with other people’s precious tax dollars too.

I pray that this money goes to the right solutions and the right people are overseeing its stewardship.

Posted by: Al Meyers | March 10, 2009

Is A Longer School Year The Answer?

As I was writing my recap post last week, I neglected to mention a topic that I’m sure will continue to get much reaction in the blogosphere.  The new secretary of education has had a strong first month as Cabinet Secretary, evoking many themes that have not gotten much attention in recent years, and have been relegated mainly to the background as the country’s priorities remained elsewhere.  However, on February 27th, the secretary announced that he is studying programs that keep kids in school longer to bost their academic achievements.  His initial comment was that American students are “at a competitive disadvantage” because the United States has shorter school years than other countries such as India and China.  While he made clear that this is one of several ideas under consideration,  I think it is critical to make one thing crystal clear:  solve the problem first, not the symptoms of the problem first.

Let me explain what I mean by the above statement.  Is more of the old, industrial age learning methods the right answer?  The education system has systemic problems.  It is dysfunctional.  The structure is broken.  The teacher training and compensation plans are not sufficient.  The pedagogy must be updated to reflect 21st century standards and 21st century requirements.  Technology infrastructures must be improved and in some cases, completely rebuilt.  The stimulus package is a strong first step, assuming that the government funds the right programs, in the right order of priority.  To me, it would seem a prudent approach to proceed as follows:

  1. Identify the model 21st century classroom and implement it as broadly as possible.
  2. Identify 21st century assessment and standards and implement as broadly as possible.
  3. Execute a robust quantitative and qualitative research study on the effect of the 21st century learning environment on student performance; compare/benchmark to other countries and other metrics as deemed appropriate by the Federal and State Education Departments.
  4. Explore other tactics once the learning environment is re-engineered (extended school year one of many options to consider).

We all realize that the education system requires a major redesign.  However, trying to do too many things at once is not the answer.  It is just going to create more fear and more concern on the part of the American people.  Extending the school year may be an option to consider downstream, but that will be accompanied by the need for increased teacher compensation, and also a possible adverse reaction from athletics organizations and parents of student athletes (and the student athletes themselves) who look to the summer as an opportunity to practice and hone their skills in a manner that is devoid of the day-to-date academic responsibilities.  Other students benefit from other “enrichment” activities such as the arts, music, etc.  So before we open up all of these other “Pandora’s Boxes,” lets get the core working first.  It should make the other options easier to evaluate and prioritize when you have the engine running smoothly again.

Posted by: Al Meyers | March 10, 2009

Startup Riot 2009 – ReinventED Technologies

A recent presentation about my vision for 21st century learning (Startup Riot 2009, Atlanta, Georgia).

Posted by: Al Meyers | March 6, 2009

A Friday Recap

After just a few weeks “blogging,” I wanted to take this opportunity on a beautiful, sunny 70+ degrees Friday to thank everyone who has clicked on my blog and taken the time out of their busy lives to read my perspectives on 21st century learning.  Hopefully, the time was not ill-spent.  While I will continue to expand on my own perspectives about 21st century education, I also use the blog to give credit and refer to some of the thought leaders who I have come to admire for their courage and their forward-thinking, research-backed ideas about how and why we need to reinvent education.  Some of them have also become trusted professional colleagues; you know who you are :)

While the Obama Stimulus Bill’s process was very partisan and, of course, not quite embraced with the plurality that followed his election to the Presidency, the $100+ Billion allocated to education should go a very long way toward injecting the “fuel” required to start the process of real reform in our education system.  However, it is important that everyone understands that money alone is not the “catch-all” panacea that will save our children from being left behind in the 21st century work environment.

As my friends at the Innosight Institute stated so eloquently in Disrupting Class:  How Disruptive Innovation Will Change The Way The World Learns, the process has to change.  So before this money is ill-spent, it is critical that educators truly a fresh approach to learning and understand that long-held assessment standards must be radically reworked.  I can’t tell you how many times in recent months I have heard:  “does it align with the standards?”  “We need to get the students ready for the tests.”  I ask you to please stop this nonsense.  The 21st century requires 21st century standards, and my biggest hope will be that the frameworks being developed by the Partnership For 21st Century Skills are mandatory standards that get integrated into every public school system in the United States.  It may not be perfect, but from what I have seen thus far, their ideas a very much a strong step in the right direction.

Over the coming days/weeks, I will continue to challenge your thnking, as well as make you aware of interesting initiatives/ideas that come across my desk.

Until then, as we say in Japan, “de wa mata”, or “See you soon”

Al

Posted by: Al Meyers | March 2, 2009

Games and STEM Education

One of the inspirations behind my vision for 21st century learning is one of our nation’s great thought leaders in the area of games and learning, Merrilea Mayo, PhD.  Merrilea is Director of Future of Learning Initiatives at the Kauffman Foundation.  She has worked tirelessly to promote the research about how video games can lead to successful learning outcomes, particularly as it relates to science and engineering.  She is one of the most selfless professionals I have had the pleasure of working with, and all she wants is to be heard, and for education to improve in the United States and abroad.

I am attaching an article she recently published in the January 2009 issue of Science Magazine, and I hope you find it as thought-provoking as I do.  Enjoy.

Science 2 January 2009:
Vol. 323. no. 5910, pp. 79 – 82
DOI: 10.1126/science.1166900

Perspective

Video Games: A Route to Large-Scale STEM Education?

Merrilea J. Mayo

Video games have enormous mass appeal, reaching audiences in the hundreds of thousands to millions. They also embed many pedagogical practices known to be effective in other environments. This article reviews the sparse but encouraging data on learning outcomes for video games in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines, then reviews the infrastructural obstacles to wider adoption of this new medium.

Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, 4801 Rockhill Road, Kansas City, MO 64110 USA. E-mail: mmayo@kauffman.org<!–
var u = “mmayo”, d = “kauffman.org”; document.getElementById(“em0″).innerHTML = ‘<a href=”mailto:’ + u + ‘@’ + d + ‘”>’ + u + ‘@’ + d + ‘<\/a>’//–>

In the 2000-to-2005 time frame, ~450,000 students graduated annually in the United States with a bachelor’s degree in STEM (1). These numbers pale in comparison to the reach of a single computer video game (Figs. 1 and 2). World of Warcraft (2), a fantasy game, has over 10 million current subscribers, with ~2.5 million in North America (3). Food Force (4), the U.N.-produced game on the mechanics of food aid distribution, saw 1 million players in its first 6 weeks and 4 million players in its first year (5). Additionally, in the realm of K-to-12 science and math education, the virtual world Whyville (6), with its game-based activities, now sports 4 million subscribers (90% North American), with the dominant demographic being 8- to 14-year-old girls (7, 8). Although traditional education institutions pride themselves on educating citizens, they do so at a relatively small scale compared with the media now available. Is it possible to greatly expand the reach of STEM education with the use of video games as the medium? And to what level of effectiveness?

Figure 1 Fig. 1. Comparison of online game subscriptions (3, 7) to U.S. bachelor’s degrees awarded across all STEM disciplines (1) as well as in just the engineering disciplines (1). Games having more than 1 million subscribers are shown. [View Larger Version of this Image (52K GIF file)]

Figure 2 Fig. 2. Comparison of online game subscriptions (3) to U.S. bachelor’s degrees awarded across all STEM disciplines (1) as well as in just the engineering disciplines (1). Games having less than 1 million subscribers are shown. [View Larger Version of this Image (57K GIF file)]

At first, the idea of using video games to teach science and engineering seems laughable. However, sophisticated video game content already exists in topics ranging from immunology (9) (Fig. 3) to numerical methods (10, 11). The examples in Table 1 suggest that video games can yield a 7 to 40% positive learning increase over a lecture program. What’s more, there may be additional benefits to poor learners: One variant of the River City ecology game (12) diminished the learning gap between D and B students to the point where nearly all students were performing at the B-student level (13).

Figure 3 Fig. 3. Protein-sized drone flying over macrophage surface in Immune Attack (9). The player is required to call neutrophils by using the drone’s ray gun to activate CXCL8 release. [View Larger Version of this Image (114K GIF file)]

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
Table 1. Learning outcomes of several games compared to lecture on same material.

Learning outcomes are by no means uniformly positive. Results from review studies (14, 15) make it clear that there are both well-designed games and poorly designed ones. Where learning benefits appear, they are attributed to effective pedagogical practices embedded in the game design (1417). Of course, many of these same practices can also be applied to classroom, Web, or other forms of instruction with similar benefits, an approach known as game-informed learning (18).

Unlike lectures, games can be adapted to the pace of the user. Games also simultaneously present information in multiple visual and auditory modes, which capitalizes on different learning styles. J. P. Gee (16) identifies the former as the “just-in-time principle” and the latter as the “multimodal principle” in his book on video game–based learning (16), reviewed in (19). Games are also particularly adept at dosing information delivery. Complex tasks are presented first as a small core experience that is practiced multiple times before being progressively extended into a longer, more complex sequence. The superior efficiency of this approach (known as concurrent chaining) has been compared with whole-task learning in (20). Gee (16) describes this kind of task structuring through his “incremental principle,”"concentrated sample principle,” and “bottom-up basic-skills principle.”

Games are also useful for reinforcing information acquisition. The rich environment of objects and activities within games gives information “situated meaning”: the other contextual elements support the information being conveyed. Social surroundings can also reinforce content. Well-constructed social interactions around societal goals within the game will drive learner engagement and achievement, as has been studied in depth by S. Barab et al. in their Quest Atlantis project (21, 22). Content is further reinforced through continuous, immediate feedback: Almost every keystroke yields a response from the game. In contrast, students in a typical classroom get to ask 0.11 questions per hour (23). And, finally, a steady stream of positive rewards accompanies a game’s rapid feedback. Players accumulate points, levels, titles, or magic swords with some visible progress for even the tiniest successes. These rewards contribute to greater self-confidence/self-efficacy. Greater self-efficacy, in turn, translates to greater persistence and thus a higher level of accomplishment (24).

Learner control over navigation through tasks and activities is a surprisingly important feature of effective learning games. The metastudy by J. J. Vogel et al. (15) found learner control/autonomy to be one of the few easily identified predictors of enhanced learning outcomes, whereas the study by R. M. Ryan et al. (25) found that it was critical to enjoyment and motivation as well. Goals in games can often be reached by multiple routes [Gee's "multiple routes principle" (16)]. But, in these branching decision structures, the learner must navigate between choices based on a considered estimation of relative consequences. In other words, the learner must operate at the highest level in B. S. Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (26), “Evaluation.”

The active, participatory style of learning in games also departs from the traditionally passive lecture [Gee's "active, critical learning principle" (16)]. Game-based tasks often require the formation of hypotheses, experimentation, and discovering the consequences of actions taken; in other words, they are very similar to the inquiry-based learning lauded by science educators (27). Increasingly, game activities are multiplayer in design, meaning problems are set up to be solved in teams. Anywhere from a handful up to 40 players interact at a time via text or voice, sharing strategies in the pursuit of game goals and learning from each other as they engage in the activity. In this context, the teacher becomes a “wise guide” who participates alongside the students. Although no game-based data are available, classroom studies show that collaborative learning yields, on average, a 50% improvement over solo learning (28).

Finally, with all else being equal, games invite more time on task. Teenagers commonly spend 5 to 8 hours per week playing games, and this equals or surpasses the time spent on homework each week (29). B. D. Coller’s racing car game, designed to teach numerical methods, resulted in twice the time spent by students on homework as a traditional class, with greater depth of understanding of the relations between concepts, and an overwhelming demand for the follow-up course (10, 11).

In contrast to the pedagogical and motivational elements found in games, some studies suggest that the lecture format is severely wanting. E. Seymour and N. Hewitt (30) chronicle near-universal antipathy to the undergraduate lecture experience, showing that 98% who leave science and engineering majors cite “poor teaching by faculty” as a major concern and that even 86% of those who stay say the same. R. R. Hake’s metastudy (31) of 6542 students in 62 introductory physics classes demonstrated only a 17% SD in learning outcomes across lecture-based classes. In contrast, the same study showed that switching to any interactive mode of instruction (e.g., group projects, Socratic lectures, participatory demonstrations) easily improved learning outcomes in introductory physics by 108%. One could certainly argue that games are about the most interactive type of content that exists today. If video games are valid pedagogical delivery vehicles and they reach many more people than lectures, why do we not see video games adopted as the learning vehicle of choice? Cultural adoption lag exists, but we also face challenges of quantity, quality, and sustainability.
Quantity
It is often assumed that games with academic content are inherently uninteresting. Yet, 4 million children voluntarily play math-and-science–based exploration games on Whyville.net (7). In my opinion, most academically developed games suffer from infrastructural challenges rather than content challenges, with respect to mass adoption. Examples include the lack of any distribution mechanism for the product, the lack of product discoverability, the prohibitive expense of content creation, the dearth of meaningful assessment (and therefore of consumer confidence in the product), and the lack of sustainable business models.

The first infrastructural challenge is the lack of any mechanism for distribution, sales, or marketing. Grants will not pay for these essential business functions that are required to reach audiences in the millions. Instead, academic games are often relegated to the office shelf or personal Web site of their creator as soon as the grant is over. One way around this dilemma is for a third entity—for example, a not-for-profit organization—to take on the business activities in exchange for intellectual property rights from the content creator.

Regarding the challenge of discoverability, academic game producers often use the Web as their distribution mechanism. However, three-dimensional (3D) content is not discoverable by search engines, which read text and text-based tags. For someone interested in capacitors, for example, Google cannot discover a virtual 3D capacitor in the middle of a game about electronics. Therefore, a key need in the area of 3D immersive games is the institution of a standardized metadata tagging system that allows users to locate appropriate 3D content with the use of common search engines. For the visually impaired who “see” 3D content only via voiced expression of tags, this tagging system is crucial. At present, there are multiple inconsistent tagging systems in use by specialized communities, but most games embed none of these.

Expense is also an important factor. User-created 2D content floods the Web. We can imagine a future in which the same is true of 3D content, and this richness of content could spur a concurrent, expanding user base of 3D games, large and small. However, the reason that 2D content is so cheap and easy to generate is the fact that almost all of it can be easily repurposed: copied, pasted, and moved from one application, document, clip-art bank, or Web site to another. In contrast, 3D content has no standard file format and thus has a limited ability to repurpose content between applications. Moving to a common file format for 3D objects—Collada and/or X3D (32, 33)—would greatly reduce graphics development costs, moving high-quality video game creation into the academic/home-user price range.
Quality
The ability to distinguish between a high- and low-quality product will be essential to the growth and credibility of game-based learning as a field. However, the first step in delivering quality is to be able to measure it. Assessment data are notoriously expensive to obtain, typically costing as much to develop as the original game. Few funders are willing to bear this double cost. To address this issue, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation (34) has begun investigating the possibility of creating a software infrastructure to automate certain assessment tasks, thereby standardizing assessment across different games, lowering the cost of assessment per game, and making it more likely that researchers and funders will engage in assessment activities. Automated assessment is surprisingly advanced in certain areas: For example, automated essay grading is now nearly identical to human essay grading (35, 36).

Games may also extend assessment into new areas. Whereas we say that we value 21st-century skills such as problem solving, teamwork, communication, and leadership, these essential traits are nowhere to be found on a modern transcript. An attractive dimension of game-based assessment is the potential to track sequences of user actions and communications, then map these onto higher-order skills and abilities. For example, in the case of problem solving, one can easily measure how often a user attempts a given problem. Attempt frequency (especially if each attempt is different) correlates highly to improved problem solving. Similarly, by monitoring users’ keystrokes while they navigate search engine results, we can distinguish between hypothesis-driven searches and random searches, another key indicator of advanced problem-solving skills.
Sustainability
The last major hurdle in expanding the use of game-based learning is arriving at sustainable business models. Academic game development, which depends on living from one grant to the next, is inherently unsustainable. However, if funders could lay the foundations in an initial grant, the same learning materials could transition to profit-generating models that could be used to expand the material’s reach after small-scale academic development is completed. These models could include corporate sponsorship, dual pay (free to some, but a fee for others) or sliding-scale fee models, subscriptions, site licensing, and the sale of virtual goods (e.g., virtual clothing to be worn by the player’s in-game character, downloadable wallpapers, electronic books that give game hints). Other business models could include leader sales to countries with nationalized education systems and hence centralized buying power, partnerships with commercial game distributors, and microcredits for microknowledge (a far-future economic concept wherein a user would pay, say, $0.99 to learn the Pythagorean theorem via a small educational module, in exchange for a math mini-credit that could aggregate with other mini-credits toward a degree). To my knowledge, none of these methods has yet been used to sustainably support academically developed games, with the possible exception of corporate sponsorship, which has supported the growth of academically developed but for-profit–operated Whyville.
Summary
Although the field is still in its embryonic stages, game-based learning has the potential to deliver science and math education to millions of users simultaneously. Unlike other mass-media experiments in education (e.g., TV, Webinars), games are a highly interactive medium with many key attributes shared with sophisticated pedagogical approaches. Large-scale adoption, however, still awaits key infrastructural developments to improve quantity (of users), quality (of product), and sustainability (of business models).

var gaJsHost = ((“https:” == document.location.protocol) ? “https://ssl.” : “http://www.”);
document.write(unescape(“%3Cscript src=’” + gaJsHost + “google-analytics.com/ga.js’ type=’text/javascript’%3E%3C/script%3E”));

try {
var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker(“UA-7724577-1″);
pageTracker._trackPageview();
} catch(err) {}

Posted by: Al Meyers | March 2, 2009

A Sneak Preview To A Longer Interview

I did a brief “teaser” interview after Startup Riot through an online website called Startupslive.tv. Here is a link to the interview: http://startupslive.tv/2009/02/25/educational-startups-need-to-be-reinvented/

Stay tuned for a link to the extended interview I did on Friday, February 27th.

I hope you find it interesting, as it provides a lens into my vision for 21st century learning.

Older Posts »

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.