This session was a Learning Circle, a new session model being tried by ELI. In this session we had about 20 in as tight a circle as 20 people can make. The focus was on how do we take 'games' to faculty? It was intended for people who are still trying to work out how games fit into the curriculum and there was a mix of experience amongst us. Firstly the model was very good - I hope the other Learning Circles worked well, it will be interesting to hear.
We have found at SHU that the word 'games' becomes a hindrance after initially using it as a hook. We have also realised that the territory maps very well to existing practice (assessment, simulation, situated learning, etc) and that technologies known collectively as games help us to take such pedagogies into the digital domain. That was my contribution.
Again a lot of talk of SL. Equally there was talk of 'Jeopardy' and when you realise those extremes are occuring in the same argument it's much easier to shift the discussion towards seeing this as an opportunity to encourage faculty to consider new pedagogies.
There was talk about whether we should develop the games ourselves and people were generally asking many of the questions that have preoccupied us, and continue to preoccupy us.
It was good to be able to make a contribution to the discussion, and I think this was seen as useful to many people. I got a lot of people wanting to talk after the session so hopefully I was making sense.
Gardner Campbell was making notes and also the discussion was recorded for a podcast so I will come back in and add a link when they become available. Probably appear here - click on the podcast tab.
I got talking to Gardner after the session which was great because he has written the most useful article on educational podcasting that I've read.
We spoke about how 'play' was a much more useful word than 'games', which led me to say that for me 'audio' is a much more useful word than 'podcasting' because it's one important step removed from technology. Technological words, I have come to realise, are good for hooking and generating interest, but must be let go because technologies are stuck in time and so constraining and they result in narrow ideas.
I'm really enjoying the opportunity to have some great discussions. Apologies to Paul because I was due to join him on the trip to Georgia Tech to see the learning space there this evening but I was too absorbed in this session to leave.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I agree - that's the most useful article I've read on educational podcasting too
I think you are right that games could be quite a loaded word. It brings forth ideas of recreation and fun, but not really learning. It could be seen as a waste of time by staff members.
Great, I like the proposal to move on from games to play. I think we need to challenge the belief that learning can't be fun.
And I agree with your analysis of the perception of technological words - that we should use them to capture interest, but talk about the underlying issues. However it is important to note that the reason that they capture interest is that they do indicate the ways that technology moves on. It's difficult to turn 'Using an audio cassette machine in teaching and learning' into news - even though we could do a great session on it"!
Post a Comment