Abstract
There are two fundamental ways to approach the use of gaming in education: playing games or designing games. In this chapter, we take the second path and discuss how to use an almost ubiquitous software tool in the schools — PowerPoint — with children in the design of original games. In these games, students put school’s content to use in ways perceived to be meaningful and authentie to them. Game design capitalizes on the natural design instincts of children. Children are natural game designers who tacitly know at deep levels what makes a good game and what makes agame fun. Turning over to them the challenge of designing agame that also teaches something is a worthy design goal and is aligned with the goals of schools and teachers. We discuss the balance between learning and motivation that must occur in the act of design and use play theory and flow theory to help explain this. Good games provide among the best exampies of cognitive psychology in action: authentie goals situated in a meaningful and motivating activity with clear and consistent feedback. However, ideas and approaches, no matter how innovative, which cannot meet the practical demands and limitations of a typical school are doomed to failure. Consequently, our approach meets head-on the issue of scalability, that is, having the idea take hold and flourish within the limited resources of a typical school with teachers who already have too many expectations placed on them.
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
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aarseth, E. (2003). Playing research: Methodological approaches to game analysis. Melbourne, Australia: Digital Art and Culture.
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, Toronto: Longmans, Green.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palinscar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3 & 4), 369–398.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Lepper, M. R., Keavney, M., & Drake, M. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic rewards: A commentary on Cameron and Pierce’s Meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(1), 5–32.
Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins.
Dempsey, J., Lucassen, B., Gilley, W., & Rasmussen, K. (1993-1994). Since Malone’s theory of intrinsically motivating instruction: What’s the score in the gaming literature? Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 22(2), 173–183.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan.
Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170–198). Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Gee, J. P. (2005). Good video games and good learning. Phi Kappa Phi Forum, Summer, 33–37.
Grabinger, R. S. (1996). Rich environments for active learning. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 665–692). Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
Grant, M. (2002). Getting a grip on project-based learning: Theory, cases, and recommendations. Meridian: Middle School Computer Technology Journal, 5(1), [On-line]. Available: http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/win2002/2514/index.html
Gredler, M. E. (2003). Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 571–581). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grodal, T. (2003). Stories for eye, ear, and muscles: Video games, media, and embodied experiences. In M. J. P. Wolf & B. Perron (Eds.), The video game theory reader (pp. 129–156). New York: Routledge.
Harel, I., & Papert, S. (Eds.). (1991). Constructionism. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Hooper, S., & Rieber, L. P. (1995). Teaching with technology. In A. C. Ornstein (Ed.), Teaching: Theory into practice (pp. 154-170). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Horwitz, P., & Christie, M. A. (2000). Computer-based manipulatives for teaching scientific reasoning: An example. In M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Learning the sciences of the 21st century: Research, design, and implementing advanced technology learning environments (pp. 163–191). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kafai, Y. (1994). Electronic play worlds: Children’s construction of video games. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick (Eds.), Constructionism in practice: Rethinking the roles of technology in learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kafai, Y. (1995). Minds in play: Computer game design as a context for children’s learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kafai, Y., & Harel, I. (1991). Learning through design and teaching: Exploring social and collaborative aspects of constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 85-106). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Kafai, Y., & Resnick, M. (Eds.). (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kafai, Y., Ching, C., & Marshall, S. (1997). Children as designers of educational multimedia software. Computers and Education, 29, 117–126.
Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning: A report for NESTA Futurelab. Retrieved September 1, 2004, from http://www.nestafiiturelab.org/research/reviews/0801.htm
Lamb, A., & Teclehaimnanot, B. (2005). A decade of WebQuests: A retrospective. In M. Orey, J. McClendon & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational Media and Technology Yearbook (Vol. 30, pp. 81-101). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Olive, J. (1998). Opportunities to explore and integrate mathematics with “The Geometer’s Sketchpad” in designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.), Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space (pp. 395–418). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Papert, S. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1-11). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York: BasicBooks.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Prensky, M. (2006). Don’ bother me mom –I’m learning! St. Paul, MN: Paragon House.
Randel, J. M., Morris, B. A., Wetzel, C. D., & Whitehill, B. V. (1992). The effectiveness of games for educational purposes: A review of recent research. Simulation and gaming, 23, 261–276.
Reeves, T. C. (2005). No significant differences revisited: A historical perspective on the research informing contemporary online learning. In G. Kearsley (Ed.), Online learning: Personal reflections on the transformation of education (pp. 299–308). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Rieber, L. P., & Matzko, M. J. (2001). Serious design of serious play in physics. Educational Technology, 41(1), 14–24.
Rieber, L. P., Luke, N., & Smith, J. (1998). Project KID DESIGNER: Constructivism at work through play. Meridian: Middle School Computer Technology Journal, 7(1), [On-line]. Available http://www.ncsu.edu/meridian/jan98/index.html.
Rieber, L. P., Smith, L., & Noah, D. (1998). The value of serious play. Educational Technology, 38(6), 29–37.
Roschelle, J., Kaput, J., & Stroup, W. (2000). SimCalc: Accelerating student engagement with the mathematics of change. In M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Learning the sciences of the 21st century: Research, design, and implementing advanced technology learning environments (pp. 47–75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Russell, T. L. (1997). The “no significant difference” phenomenon as reported in 248 research reports, summaries, and papers (4 ed.). Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S. & Przybylski, A. (2006). The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Education, 30(4), 344–360.
Spiro, R., Kolodner, J., Pea, R., Roschelle, J., Soloway, E., Scardamalia, M., et al. (2002). You say you want a revolution...? Can new technologies enable radically new kinds of learning? Part 1. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
Squire, K. (2002). Cultural framing of computer/video games. The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 2(1), Available online: http://www.gamestudies.org/0102/squire/
Sutton-Smith, B. (1997). The ambiguity of play. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Wineburg, S. (2001). Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts: Changing the Future of Teaching the Past. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Wolf, M. J. (2001). Narrative in the video game. In M. J. P. Wolf (Ed.), The medium of the video game (pp. 93–112). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rieber, L., Barbour, M., Thomas, G., Rauscher, D. (2009). Learning by Designing Homemade PowerPoint Games. In: Miller, C. (eds) Games: Purpose and Potential in Education. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09775-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09775-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-09774-9
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-09775-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)