2015 IEEE Games, Entertainment, and Media (GEM) Conference

Posted on by
Reply
Approximate Reading Time: < 1 minute

2012-07-01-17-10-28b_wmIEEE-GEM.ORG.

There’s still time to submit your proposals.

The IEEE Consumer Electronics Society is pleased to announce the 2015 IEEE Games, Entertainment, and Media (GEM) Conference, the seventh conference in a series of successful IEEE Game Innovation Conferences. The venue will provide an opportunity for the demonstration and study of the ways in which games and game technologies are transforming the educational and cultural landscape. The exhibition area will allow researchers, developers, industry professionals, and artists to demonstrate how they are using these technologies in research, as teaching tools, and as means of modifying behavior in any number of fields.

The IEEE GEM 2015 conference is a platform for disseminating innovative research and development work on game, entertainment, and media technologies, applying lessons learned, and developing new ideas through audience interaction. Participation from all sectors including academia, industry, and government is welcome. The IEEE GEM 2015 conference brings together researchers, developers, industry, and government partners for formal and informal engagement and examination of emergent features of computer game development for entertainment, for learning/teaching, for serious purposes, and to impact society. IEEE GEM 2015 also provides an important forum for future game, entertainment, and media development talent to gain perspective on the knowledge, skills and attitude required to succeed in the game development world.

Important Deadlines:
Submission deadline:

  • Full, and short papers: Tuesday, June 30, 2015
  • Posters/Extended abstracts Friday, July 31, 2015
  • Workshop, tutorial, panel and demo proposals Friday, July 31, 2015

Notification:

  • Full, and short papers: Friday, July 31, 2015
  • Posters/Extended abstracts Friday, August 21, 2015
  • Workshop, tutorial, panel and demo proposals Friday, August 21, 2015

Final submission:

  • Full, and short papers: Monday, August 17, 2015
  • Extended abstracts Friday, August 28, 2015
  • Workshop, tutorial, panel and demo proposals Friday, August 28, 2015
Be the first to like.

Unlike

A Few Game Creation Resources

Posted on by
Reply
Approximate Reading Time: < 1 minute

1990-001b_wmI’m putting these here, so I’ll be able to find them again.

Create Games with Construct 2 – Scirra.com

 An HTML 5 Game creator. I haven’t tried it myself so can’t comment on how good it is. Looks interesting though. Meant for 2D games.

List of game engines – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 One of Wikipedia’s lovely lists. It includes the usual comparative table. A handy resource.

12 alternative game engines | Game Development Tools & Tech | Develop

What can I say? I’m a sucker for lists.

Be the first to like.

Unlike

Games vs Game-based Learning vs Gamification – My Version

Posted on by
19
Approximate Reading Time: < 1 minute

In response to the other day’s post about the differences between these terms, I have produced my own table outlining the differences. You’ll notice mine is a little more complex. That’s because the differences are more complex than the original one implied.

game-gbl-gamification

Note: This image is not to be posted anywhere or re-used without my written permission.

(You are free to disagree with me, just don’t present this table as yours).

NOTE: If You want an updated version of this table, see my post from February 3, 2018:

What’s the difference between serious games, educational games, and game-based learning?

Addendum 2021: A newer version of this chart has been peer-reviewed and published on academia.edu.

https://www.academia.edu/45044609/What_s_the_difference_between_gamification_serious_games_educational_games_and_game_based_learning
Citation: Becker, K. (2021). What’s the difference between gamifcation, serious games, educational games,and game-based learning? Academia Letters, Article 209. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL209

7 people like this post.

Unlike

Worth repeating: Mythical Retention Data & The Corrupted Cone

Posted on by
1
Approximate Reading Time: < 1 minute

csilence1Will at Work Learning: Mythical Retention Data & The Corrupted Cone.

Thank you Will Thalheimer for taking the time to pull this all together. This is one of those trite myths that is so popular but that actually has the potential to cause damage.

 

I’ve commented on this before, as have others but this is one of those myths that seems to keep hanging on.

1 person likes this post.

Unlike

Games vs Game-based Learning vs Gamification

Posted on by
8
Approximate Reading Time: 3 minutes

So many people are confused about the differences between these terms. Unfortunately, this article just muddies the waters further.

Games vs Game-based Learning vs Gamification | The Upside Learning Blog.

It’s a great effort, but I’m afraid none of these are quite right. You may want to check out some of the resources on my site (or read my upcoming book)

From the article: http://www.upsidelearning.com/blog/index.php/2015/05/21/games-vs-game-based-learning-vs-gamification/comment-page-1/#comment-1917780

Here are some definitions that come closer (check this post for my version):

Game:

What you are describing under “game” is in fact only entertainment games. There are many other kinds of games, and rewards are not always secondary, nor are they necessarily hard or expensive to build (that would describe AAA games), NOR are story and scenes part of the game (that excludes most puzzle games). When it comes to winning or losing: there are plenty of entertainment games where winning and losing is not possible.

Game-Based Learning:

GBL does not require a game specifically designed for educational purposes – it is the use of games in a learning context. Sometimes just playing the game is intrinsically rewarding is true of any GOOD game. Educational and other serious games rarely have the kinds of budgets that AAA games do, so they are not necessarily expensive. Good design is always hard and that applies to learning as well as all kinds of learning that involve games or game elements. Creating good learning is hard. Adding a game or game elements makes it harder still.

Gamification:

I would say that having optional intrinsic rewards describes BAD gamification. Good gamification is hard to do (as is good design of ANY kind). I would agree that gamification is often added like a skin on top of the content, which is why so much of it is poorly done, and largely ineffective. You may want to check out my gamification resources.

Here are a couple of definitions from my upcoming book that may help to clear things up a bit:

Digital Game Based Learning (DGBL)
Learning of some knowledge, skills, attitudes that happens with the deliberate use of digital games. This could involve learning by playing games, but it can also involve learning through building games. DGBL is about learning with games.
Specifically, DGBL is the theory of how learning happens with the use of (primarily digital) games. Game based learning draws on a variety of other learning theories to explain how people learn with games.

Digital Game Pedagogy (DGP)
As pedagogy is about the study, and theory of teaching, digital game pedagogy is about the study and theory of teaching with games. It is a term not commonly used, but it is meant to highlight the distinction between learning from games and teaching with games. The two terms are closely related but are effectively opposite sides of the same coin – one from the perspective of the learner and the other from the perspective of the teacher.

Game
A game:

  • Is interactive
  • Has rules
  • Has one or more goals
  • Has a quantifiable measure of progress(or success)
  • Has a recognizable ending

Gamification
Gamification is the use of game design elements in non-game contexts. It is not necessarily about learning and can be used in any context. Examples include companies that offer points, reward systems, badges, and other incentive-based techniques, usually with the intent of increasing brand association and loyalty.

 Serious Game
A game that has been designed to have a purpose other than or in addition to entertainment. While some entertainment games are often used as educational games, such as Sid Meyer’s Civilization, it is the designed intent that classifies a game as serious. Games like Civilization is a game used for serious purposes.

NOTE: For a more detailed and clear table outlining the similarities and differences, see my post from February 3, 2018:

What’s the difference between serious games, educational games, and game-based learning?

4 people like this post.

Unlike

Walking the Talk : Signature Pedagogies and Metateaching in Graduate-Level Education Courses

Posted on by
Reply
Approximate Reading Time: < 1 minute

Here’s another fairly recent talk, also from CNIE 2014.

[P] Presentation Becker, K. (2014) Walking the Talk : Signature Pedagogies and Metateaching in Graduate-Level Education Courses, CNIE 2014 Confluences: Spaces, Places & Cultures for Innovative Learning, Kamloops, BC, May 13-16, 2014 Canadian Network for Innovation In Education (CNIE)

Abstract

Many M.Ed. programs claim to incorporate signature pedagogies in their programs, which often include approaches such as inquiry-based, case-based, and problem-based learning, communities of learners, and more.   Teacher education is unique among disciplines in that we are doing what we are teaching. Metateaching has been defined as thinking about teaching (Timpson 1999), but if metacognition is thinking about thinking, and a meta-language is a language about languages, then metateaching is in fact teaching about teaching. If we combine this with notions of signature pedagogies and the idea that we should be modeling what we are teaching, then what does this mean at the graduate level?   It means that graduate instructors should themselves be modeling what they are teaching. Wouldn’t signature pedagogy in education be one that actually implements the theories and models being studied in order to teach those same theories and models? Shouldn’t it be one that employs experimental designs and invites the students (most of who are teachers) to examine the course design as it’s being taught? Wouldn’t it make sense to have the students have input into the design and/or teaching?   This presentation will examine the common approach to teaching graduate level education courses – the seminar – and suggest an alternate approach that uses the theories and models being taught and where the teaching methodology matches the kind of work the participants will do when they graduate.

3 people like this post.

Unlike

The Virtue of Failure – Designing Games You Can’t Win for Learning

Posted on by
Reply
Approximate Reading Time: 2 minutes

Thought I should upload a few of my more recent talks.

This one is from the CNIE conference in May 2014 that I did with Dana Ruggiero.

[P] Presentation Ruggiero, D. & Becker, K. (2014) The Virtue of Failure: Designing Games You Can’t Win for Learning, CNIE 2014 Confluences: Spaces, Places & Cultures for Innovative Learning, Kamloops, BC, May 13-16, 2014 Canadian Network for Innovation In Education (CNIE)

Abstract

Just what do we learn from playing serious games?

Especially common in games for learning is the notion that participants need to be able to win the game, but is it always necessary for the player to win in order to ‘get’ our message? In his studies of productive failure, Kapur (2008) has suggested that failure can be important to learning. Indeed, when we think back on our most memorable learning experiences we often find that these lessons are things learned through failure rather than success. Learning through failure is an effective way to help people learn how to cope with situations where there is no clear solution (Dorner, et al., 1990), and for certain kinds of messages negative messages delivered via games you can’t win may be more powerful than those you can.

This presentation explores a class of games where ‘winning’ doesn’t look the way we expect it to look. Some games don’t allow players to win at all, in which case the ‘message’ is effectively a cautionary tale. The authors refer to these games as “games you can’t win”, and they form a distinctly different approach to game design (examples include: Sweatshop, Darfur is Dying, and September 12th). This presentation will examine the philosophical background of games in education, the design of serious games, and look at both accidental and deliberately designed unwinnable games and how this relates to learning objectives.

Be the first to like.

Unlike

Another Sneak Peak into My Upcoming Book

Posted on by
Reply
Approximate Reading Time: < 1 minute

Instructional Strategies for Use with Games

Interested in using games in the classroom but not quite sure how?

My upcoming book will have an extensive set of supplementary materials, from summaries of the theories and models discussed in the book, to templates of lesson plans and teacher guides.

It will also include a list of 100 or so instructional strategies that have either been designed specifically for game based learning lessons, or that have been adapted to work with games.

Check out the book blog for a sneak peak at a few of them.

Be the first to like.

Unlike