Abstract
This chapter explores the potential, or “transformational possibilities” (Digital games and learning, Continuum, London, 2011), of game-based teaching and what scaling it up might mean for education. It revisits the themes of the first chapter such as teaching for transfer and developing novice thinking into expert thinking in order to encourage readers to think about what happens beyond their curricular game. It also encourages readers to mentor other teachers to help them develop their own curricular games. Finally, it concludes by proposing that game-based teaching can radically alter the path of education by transforming teaching and learning in a way that brings a new approach to thinking in the twenty-first century by exploring what it means to take a gaming stance.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
-Attributed to multiple people including Yogi Berra, Karl Marx, and computer scientist Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Suggested Reading: Non-Fiction
Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
DeKoven, B. (2013). Well-played game. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fried, R. (2005). Game of school: Why we all play it, how it hurts kids what it takes to change it. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.
Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of a participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McGonigal, J. (2011b). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. London: Penguin Books.
Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Turkle, S. (1984). The second self: Computers and the human spirit. New York: Simon and Schuster.
References
Barab, S., Pettyjohn, P., Gresalfi, M., & Solomou, M. (2012). Game-based curricula, personal engagement, and the Modern Prometheus design project. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 306–326). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Chatham, R. E. (2011). After the revolution. In S. Tobias & J. D. Fletcher (Eds.), Computer games and instruction (pp. 73–99). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers.
Choontanom, T., & Nardi, B. (2012). Theorycrafting: The art and science of using numbers to interpret the world. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 185–209). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Clark, D., & Martinez-Garza, M. (2012). Prediction and explanation as design mechanics in conceptually integrated digital games to help players articulate the tacit understandings they build through game play. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 279–305). New York: Cambridge University Press.
De Freitas, S., & Maharg, P. (2011). Digital games and learning. London: Continuum.
Doidge, N. (2007). The brain that changes itself: Stories of personal triumph from the frontiers of brain science. New York: Penguin Books.
Fullerton, T., Swain, C., & Hoffman, S. (2004). Game design workshop: Designing, prototyping, and playtesting games. San Francisco, CA: CMP Books.
Gee, J. P. (2007). Good videogames + good learning: Collected essays on videogames, learning, and literacy. New York: Peter Lang.
Gee, J. P. (2008). Video games, learning, and ‘content’. In C. T. Miller (Ed.), Games: Purpose and potential in education (pp. 43–53). New York: Springer.
Gee, J. P. (2012). Foreword. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. xvii–xx). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented learning: Research and design of mobile educational games. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Loh, C. S. (2007). Designing online games assessment as ‘information trails’. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning: Research and development frameworks (pp. 323–348). Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
LoPiccolo, G., Squire, K., & Chu, S. (2012). Interview with Harmonix. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 108–120). New York: Cambridge University Press.
McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. London: Penguin Books.
McGonigal, J. (2008). Why I love bees. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning (pp. 199–227). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Poundstone, W. (2006). Game theory. In K. Salen & E. Zimmerman (Eds.), The game designer reader: A rules of play anthology (pp. 382–408). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schell, J. (2008). The art of game design: A book of lenses. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Shaffer, D. W. (2012). Models of situated action: Computer games and the problem of transfer. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 403–431). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Squire, K. (2008). Open-ended video games. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning (pp. 167–198). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning: Teaching and participatory culture in the digital age. New York: Teachers College Press.
Squire, K. (2012). Designed cultures. In C. Steinkuehler, K. Squire, & S. Barab (Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 3–31). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stavenga de Jong, J. A., Wierstra, R. F. A., & Hermanussen, J. (2006). An exploration of the relationship between academic and experiential learning approaches in vocational education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(1), 155–169.
Tobias, S., Fletcher, J. D., Dai, D., & Wind, A. (2011). Review of research on computer games. In S. Tobias & J. D. Fletcher (Eds.), Computer games and instruction (pp. 127–221). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishers.
Fiction
Card, O. S. (1985). Ender’s game. New York: Tor Books. In the novel Ender’s Game, the main character is led to believe that he is playing a video game as practice for real warfare when, in fact, he is actually orchestrating his side’s spaceships. Because he believes he is playing a game (although it is debatable whether or not he is completely duped) as practice and not the real thing, he is willing to take a huge risk, one that pays off in the end.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Suggested Mentoring Quest Rubric
Criteria | “Wow! I mean, I think this might work.” (3) | “Hmm, this might be acceptable.” (2) | “I need more convincing.” (1) | “Go back to the drawing board.” (0) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Tailored to teacher | Teacher pushed just beyond level of tech use with appropriate scaffolding | Adjusted to teacher’s level of tech use | Teacher’s level of tech use identified | No mention of teacher characteristics |
Tailored to content area | Interdisciplinary connections explored | Discussion capitalizes on synergy created when games and content area integrated | Discussion of how games fit or do not fit with content area | No mention of content area |
Tailored to students | Discuss adaptations for potential future students including ELLs and special ed students | Range of students in particular class taken into account | Twenty-first-century learners’ needs taken into account | No mention of students |
Tailored to resources | Ways to capitalize on affordances and counter-constraints discussed | Affordances discussed | Constraints discussed | No mention of resources |
Revision cycle | Discussion gets teacher to think of ideas about how to use playtesting to revise game on his/her own | Discussion of how feedback will be used to revise game | Discussion of how feedback will be collected | No mention of revision cycle |
Techie (1 extra point) | ||||
Post a comment on an article or blog post about game-based teaching (provide link) | ||||
Tech Savvy (2 extra points) | ||||
Post a description of how you used game-based teaching on a blog, listserv, or other online space that is either public or frequented by teachers (provide link) | ||||
Tech Guru (3 extra points) | ||||
Use of screencasting tools to share examples of your curricular game with others | ||||
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kellinger, J.J. (2017). End Game: Passing It On. In: A Guide to Designing Curricular Games. Advances in Game-Based Learning. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42393-7_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42393-7_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42392-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42393-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)