Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/1920778.1920794acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfutureplayConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Epidemic: e-learning goes viral

Published: 06 May 2010 Publication History

Abstract

In this case study, we document the development and user-testing of Epidemic: Self-care for Crisis, an online educational resource that invites users (aged 14--20) to develop game-based knowledge and practices around prevention, self-care and (mis)information in the face of contagious diseases -- a timely project, given the ongoing anxieties, and false (and not so false) alarms, over SARS, Avian Flu, and H1N1. Contagion, the forerunner to Epidemic, mobilized the conventions and mechanics of single-player adventure games to engage players 'experientially' with health-and disease-related understandings: we configured the same basic self-care information as "narrative knowledge" [27] intended to mobilize players' attention and intelligence voluntarily, using narrative as a rhetorical strategy. We were using narrative's traditional, paradigmatic function within literate cultural forms of interpellation---stories of playful, pleasurable persuasion designed to engage players,
Epidemic takes a decidedly different tack towards delivering the same educational content. Reconfiguring digital play within social networking conventions affords us a design-based platform for fundamental theory development in game-based learning. Epidemic's modular, Flash and XML-based design allows for accessible and straightforward creation and editing of educational 'content', both textual and visual: players can generate and publish their own virus-like avatars, stop-motion animations, and disease-related public service announcements. Some interesting divergences in play-based education on community health/self care, between interactive narrative and social-networking configurations for ludic knowledge representation, appear noteworthy.
Our user-testing, we argue, signifies a further innovation in the field of educational game design, leaving behind the clichéd concern over 'what did you learn today' in favor of focusing on when and how laughter, engagement and attention are most at work. Taken together, these innovations instantiate an approach to digitally-mediated learning that construes and practices assessment differently than in traditional education (and in educational technology design), which are more concerned with propositionally identifiable learning outcomes. In the case of Epidemic, however, we are more concerned with how play-based learning design can best support the cultivation of responsible and critically-informed attitudes towards public health.

References

[1]
Alvermann, D. E. (Ed.) 2002. Adolescents and Literacies in a Digital World. Peter Lang.
[2]
Bradford, P., Porciello, M., Balkon, N. & Backus, D. (2006) The Blackboard Learning System: the be all and end all in educational instruction? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 301--314. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/X137-X73L-5261-5656.
[3]
de Castell, S. and Bryson, M. 1998. Re-tooling play: dystopia, dysphoria, and difference. In J. Cassell and H. Jenkins, (Eds.), From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and computer games. MIT Press, 232--261.
[4]
de Castell, S., Bryson, M. and Jenson, J. 2002. Object lessons: towards an educational theory of technology. First Monday, 7 (1). http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_1/castell/
[5]
de Castell, S. and Jenson, J. 2005. Serious play. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35 (6), 649--665.
[6]
de Castell, S. and Jenson, J. 2006. Education, gaming and serious play: new attentional economies for learning. In J. Weiss, J. Nolan and P, Trifonas (Eds.) International Handbook of Virtual Learning Environments. Kluwer Academic Press, 999--1018.
[7]
de Castell, S. and Jenson, J., and Taylor, N. 2007. Digital games for education: when meanings play. Intermedialities, 9, 45--54.
[8]
Dougiamas, M. 1999. Moodle -- a web application for building quality online courses. http://moodle.com/.
[9]
Downes, S. 2005. E-learning 2.0. e-Learn Magazine (Oct. 2005). http://www.cmb.ac.lk/newsletter/ext_pages/Vlc/E-learning%202.pdf.
[10]
Ducheneaut, N., Wen, M., Yee, N., and Wadley, G. 2009. Body and mind: a study of avatar personalization in three virtual worlds. Proceedings of CHI 2009.
[11]
Gee, J. P. 1992. The Social Mind: Language, Ideology, and Social Practice. Bergin & Garvey.
[12]
Gee, J. P. 2003. What Videogames Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy. Palgrave Macmillan.
[13]
Gee, J. P. 2007. Pleasure, learning, video games and life: the projective stance. In M. Knobel and C. Lankshear (Eds.) A New Literacies Sampler. Peter Lang.
[14]
Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., and Tejeda, C. 1999. Rethinking diversity: hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, an Activity: An International Journal, 6 (4), 286--303.
[15]
Hedberg, J. 2003. Ensuring quality e-learning: creating engaging tasks. Educational Media International, 40 (3), 175--186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0952398032000113095.
[16]
Huizinga, J. 1955. Homo Ludens; A Study Of The Play-Element In Culture. Beacon Press.
[17]
Jenson, J., Taylor, N., and de Castell, S. (2007). Shifting design values: a playful approach to serious content. E-Learning 4 (4), 497--507.
[18]
Kafai, Y. B. 2006. Playing and making games for learning: instructionist and constructionist perspectives for game studies. Games and Culture, 1(1), 36--40.
[19]
Kafai, Y. B. 1995. Minds in Play: Computer Game Design as a Context for Children's Learning. Erlbaum.
[20]
Kress, G. 2003. Literacy in the New Media Age. Routledge.
[21]
Kress, G., and van Leeuwen, T. 1996. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. Routledge.
[22]
Lanham, R. 1997. The economics of attention. Michigan Quarterly Review 36, 270--284.
[23]
Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. 2002. Do we have your attention? New literacies, digital technologies and the education of adolescents. In D. Alvermann, (Ed.) Adolescents and Literacies in a Digital World. Peter Lang, 19--38.
[24]
Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. 2003. New Literacies: Changing Knowledge and Classroom Learning. Open University Press.
[25]
Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. 2007. Researching new literacies: Web 2.0 practices and insider perspectives. E-Learning, 4 (3), 224--240.
[26]
Lotherington, H. 2005. Writing postmodern fairy tales at Main Street School: digital narratives and evolving transliteracies. McGill Journal of Education, 40 (1), 109--119.
[27]
Murray, J. H. 1998. Hamlet on the holodeck: the future of narrative in cyberspace. MIT Press.
[28]
New London Group. 1996. A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66 (1), 60--92.
[29]
Prensky, M. 2001, Digital Game-Based Learning. McGraw-Hill.
[30]
Rieber, L. P. (1996). Seriously considering play: designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology Research & Development, 44 (2), 43--58.
[31]
Salen, K. and Zimmerman, E. 2004. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. MIT Press.
[32]
Sedgwick, E. 2003. Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity. Duke University Press.
[33]
Seely-Brown, J. and Adler, R. P. 2008. Minds on fire: open education, the long tail, and Learning 2.0. Educause (Jan.-Feb. 2008), 17--32.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Teaching and learning about respiratory infectious diseases: A scoping review of interventions in K‐12 educationJournal of Research in Science Teaching10.1002/tea.2179759:7(1274-1300)Online publication date: 21-Jul-2022
  • (2019)A Systematic Review of the Definition and Measurement of Engagement in Serious GamesProceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference10.1145/3290688.3290747(1-10)Online publication date: 29-Jan-2019

Recommendations

Reviews

Howard E. Whitston

Taylor et al. describe their rationale for using a social networking framework to engage students in active learning, with the goal of developing responsible health-related attitudes in 14- to 20-year-olds. The introduction begins with a discussion of the previous game's problems, what the authors learned from those problems, and how that changed Epidemic 's direction to one of using social networking to enable students to interact voluntarily with the data. The background starts with educational game design questions about what makes a game fun. The authors then discuss why they selected Flash, Extensible Markup Language (XML), and Web 2.0 to build their Flutube and Propaganda Maker modules. They also outline how these tools will allow nonprogrammers to add to the existing pool of content. Although Epidemic isn't a true game, its social networking framework includes elements of a game. The first design choice rewards users with more content as they explore the modules. The second design choice is a Facebook-like interface. The assessment is informal, although the authors do note the amount of time spent using each module for each user. The paper ends with a discussion about assessment versus outcomes, including where the authors stand on these issues. A major problem with this study is its use of Flash, which is definitely not blind-user-friendly. Online Computing Reviews Service

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
Futureplay '10: Proceedings of the International Academic Conference on the Future of Game Design and Technology
May 2010
282 pages
ISBN:9781450302357
DOI:10.1145/1920778
  • Conference Chairs:
  • Bill Kapralos,
  • Andrew Hogue,
  • Simon Xu
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

  • Algoma University College

In-Cooperation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 May 2010

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. e-learning
  2. educational gaming
  3. games for health
  4. user-testing

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

Futureplay '10
Sponsor:
Futureplay '10: Futureplay '10 @ GDC Canada
May 6 - 7, 2010
British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)5
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 12 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Teaching and learning about respiratory infectious diseases: A scoping review of interventions in K‐12 educationJournal of Research in Science Teaching10.1002/tea.2179759:7(1274-1300)Online publication date: 21-Jul-2022
  • (2019)A Systematic Review of the Definition and Measurement of Engagement in Serious GamesProceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference10.1145/3290688.3290747(1-10)Online publication date: 29-Jan-2019

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media