David Parsons – Massey University, New Zealand
Krassie Petrova – AUT University, New Zealand


 International Conference on eLearning Futures (ELC 2011)
                  Auckland, New Zealand
                  30 November – 1 December 2011
 Technicalfeatures alone do not make a
  game either engaging or pedagogical
 Need to embed both effective gaming
  experiences and worthwhile learning
  outcomes into the same application
 Augmented   reality outdoor mobile learning
  game for two players
 Follows classic linear fiction model
 Narrative path is reflected by a physical
  path
  • Players navigate to locations and investigate the
   problem they have to solve
 Players have to gather, analyze and reflect
  on various (and sometimes conflicting)
  pieces of information about a mobile
  phone manufacturing company that is
  having some problems
 Aims to teach higher level skills (analysis,
  synthesis, critical thinking)
 Move      around campus
  User‟s current position




  User‟s next position




 Locations  represent parts of the company
 Pick up virtual and physical artifacts
  • Video, questions, documents
 Resources              unfold problems
 Non-zero-sum     game
  • One player does not win at the expense of the
    other
  • Both players „win‟ together.
  • The strategies chosen by each player determine
    the outcome of the game
 Associatedwith each possible outcome of
 the game is some kind of a payoff
 Model      of classic linear fiction
  • “Such a structuring of events may even…be a
    standard model of human perception …From a
    position of ignorance the interactor is taken
    through a learning process that ends in a climax.”

  The Road not Taken -
  The Hows and Whys of
  Interactive Fiction
  Jonas Heide Smith
Teaser            Game   tree

             Elaboration


 Conflict                   Conflict
Escalation                 Escalation

               Climax




             Resolution
“the bad press I
have been getting
from the daily rag”
 “moaning
 developers … keep
 talking about
 fragmentation this
 and fragmentation
 that”
“So what if some of our
                     products get returned or
                     malfunction, look how
                     many of them are released
                     that are okay!”


“A potato is still a potato any way you dress it
up, Samantha over at R&D has a lot to answer
for!”
 “Iwas pushed out by Martin …I leave
  phone messages and emails constantly
  but he never gets back to me…the man is
  impossible.”
“Jimmy dropped a pallet of batteries…”

    you two have already
    taken up enough time …
    What issues have you
    found with the business
    and how do you think I
    can get this place back
    on top?
 Analysis
  • What does this tell me?
 Synthesis
  • How do these different
    sources relate to one
    another?
 Critical   Thinking
  • Why am I getting different
    stories from different
    people?
 Sample   of 14 players of the game
 7 point Likert scale
   • „I found the game provided an enjoyable way to learn‟
     (average 6.04)
   • „I felt engaged in the activity of playing the game‟
     (average 5.57).
 Interview comments:
   • “...good game ...playing it was awesome... The idea
     was wonderful…”
   • “…I liked it because it was a different way to go about
     solving problems.”
 In   proceedings of ICITA 2011
 Migrate   application from Java ME to
  Android
 Build a configuration tool that can be used
  to customize the application
 Perform a a larger evaluation
 Create an open source project

Designing mobile games for engagement and learning

  • 1.
    David Parsons –Massey University, New Zealand Krassie Petrova – AUT University, New Zealand International Conference on eLearning Futures (ELC 2011) Auckland, New Zealand 30 November – 1 December 2011
  • 2.
     Technicalfeatures alonedo not make a game either engaging or pedagogical  Need to embed both effective gaming experiences and worthwhile learning outcomes into the same application
  • 3.
     Augmented reality outdoor mobile learning game for two players  Follows classic linear fiction model  Narrative path is reflected by a physical path • Players navigate to locations and investigate the problem they have to solve
  • 4.
     Players haveto gather, analyze and reflect on various (and sometimes conflicting) pieces of information about a mobile phone manufacturing company that is having some problems  Aims to teach higher level skills (analysis, synthesis, critical thinking)
  • 5.
     Move around campus User‟s current position User‟s next position  Locations represent parts of the company  Pick up virtual and physical artifacts • Video, questions, documents  Resources unfold problems
  • 6.
     Non-zero-sum game • One player does not win at the expense of the other • Both players „win‟ together. • The strategies chosen by each player determine the outcome of the game  Associatedwith each possible outcome of the game is some kind of a payoff
  • 7.
     Model of classic linear fiction • “Such a structuring of events may even…be a standard model of human perception …From a position of ignorance the interactor is taken through a learning process that ends in a climax.” The Road not Taken - The Hows and Whys of Interactive Fiction Jonas Heide Smith
  • 8.
    Teaser  Game tree Elaboration Conflict Conflict Escalation Escalation Climax Resolution
  • 9.
    “the bad pressI have been getting from the daily rag”
  • 10.
     “moaning developers… keep talking about fragmentation this and fragmentation that”
  • 11.
    “So what ifsome of our products get returned or malfunction, look how many of them are released that are okay!” “A potato is still a potato any way you dress it up, Samantha over at R&D has a lot to answer for!”
  • 12.
     “Iwas pushedout by Martin …I leave phone messages and emails constantly but he never gets back to me…the man is impossible.”
  • 13.
    “Jimmy dropped apallet of batteries…”
  • 14.
    you two have already taken up enough time … What issues have you found with the business and how do you think I can get this place back on top?
  • 15.
     Analysis • What does this tell me?  Synthesis • How do these different sources relate to one another?  Critical Thinking • Why am I getting different stories from different people?
  • 16.
     Sample of 14 players of the game  7 point Likert scale • „I found the game provided an enjoyable way to learn‟ (average 6.04) • „I felt engaged in the activity of playing the game‟ (average 5.57).  Interview comments: • “...good game ...playing it was awesome... The idea was wonderful…” • “…I liked it because it was a different way to go about solving problems.”
  • 17.
     In proceedings of ICITA 2011
  • 18.
     Migrate application from Java ME to Android  Build a configuration tool that can be used to customize the application  Perform a a larger evaluation  Create an open source project