Completing secondary, and post-secondary schooling qualifications by 1993, any previous game-based learnings or experiences during my education were non-digital and minimal in impact, or perhaps I didn’t recognise the deeper meaning of participating in these activities at the time.

Reflecting on the work of Becker (2011) who includes simulation within game-based learning and my 32-year education as a Paramedic, has provided deeper perspective on this form of learning in my context, Lord (2003).  While Becker (2011) did not include non-digital simulation, I have considered the similarities between digital and live-action role play (LARP) ‘games’, although I recognise going digital changes things.  Elements similar to both came from reflecting on Koster (2005) seminal work and Kapp (2012).

Koster (2005) defined a game as “a system in which players engage in an abstract challenge, defined by rules, interactivity, and feedback, that results in a quantifiable outcome often eliciting an emotional reaction” (p. 34).

LARP simulations include game fundamentals such as:

• A system of interconnected elements
• Players (learners)
• High/low fidelity abstractions of reality
• Challenge/s
• Rules
• Interactivity (physical)
• Feedback (delayed or immediate)
• High-risk quantifiable outcomes
• Emotional reactions.

List adapted from Kapp (2012).

While simulation is a mainstay for paramedic learning, the current challenge is to add this form and other game-based learning, along with gamification to the online and blended learning environments which are now my teaching context.

Kapp (2012) defined gamification as “using game-based mechanics, aesthetics and game thinking to engage people, motivate action, promote learning, and solve problems” (p. 10). However, like any learning and teaching activity, game-based learning and gamification have to be introduced in a systematic strategy.  Unlike the blanket approach of “pedagogy before technology” espoused by Watson (2001), I consider when discussing ‘serious games’, technology and pedagogy are interdependent for successful outcomes.

When discussing ‘serious games’, or those used for educational outcomes, acknowledgement of the primary purpose (other than fun) and the complexity of the interplay between elements is useful, Parker, Becker, and Sawyer (2008). Elements include:

• First and foremost, the desired learning outcomes and content
• Feedback to support learning
• Learning theories (cognitive, social, cultural)to support pedagogy
• Game development theory to inform design including forms of engagement, aesthetics, Kapp (2012), and mechanics (game, learning and assessment), Plass, Homer, Kinzer, and Sieif El-Nasr (2013)

While in the infancy of increasing my knowledge and application of digital game-based learning, I would consider the above within both the Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, by Koehler and Mishra (2009) and, the Substitution, Augmentation, Modification and Redefinition (SAMR) Framework, by Puentedura (2012) as I’m familiar with these.

What I’ve neglected to mention above is the positive attitude, training and, familiarity with platforms educators require to ensure the success of the learning package, Kauffman (2015).  I feel taking the above approach to these transmedia environments (Lamb, 2011) will aid my understanding of the complexities between the ‘game’ and the broader learning environment.

However, notwithstanding the above, I’m doubtful there is an off-the-shelf game which will allow me to provide a meaningful learning experience to my cohorts.  To provide opportunities for students to learn and develop 21st-century skills such as communication, collaboration, problem-solving and critical thinking, it’s likely I will have to modify existing product/s.

Perhaps though I don’t know enough about the educational gaming environment yet.

Reference List

Becker, K. (2011). Distinctions between games and learning: A review of current literature on games in education. In Gaming and Simulations: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications (pp. 75-107). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction game-based methods and strategies for training and education. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Kauffman, H. (2015). A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23(1). doi:10.3402/rlt.v23.26507

Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.

Koster, R. (2005). A theory of fun for game design. Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press.

Koster, R. (2014). A theory of fun for game design.

Lamb, A. (2011). Reading redefined for a transmedia universe. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(3), 12-17.

Lord, B. (2003). The development of a degree qualification for paramedics at Charles Sturt University. Journal of Emergency Primary Health Care, 1(1-2). doi:10.33151/ajp.1.1.40

Parker, J., Becker, K., & Sawyer, B. (2008). Re-reconsidering research on learning from media: Comments on Richard E. Clark’s point of view column on serious games. Educational Technology Magazine, Jan-Feb 2008, 39-43.

Plass, J., Homer, B., Kinzer, C., & Sieif El-Nasr, M. (2013). Game analytics: Maximizing the value of player data. In M. Seif El-Nasr, A. Drachen, & A. Canossa (Eds.), Game analytics: Maximizing the value of player data (1st ed. 2013. ed., pp. 697-725). London: Springer London.

Puentedura, R. (2012, 3 September, 2012). Building upon SAMR. Retrieved from http://hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2012/09/03/BuildingUponSAMR.pdf

Watson, D. (2001). Pedagogy before technology: Re-thinking the relationship between ICT and teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 6(4), 251-266. doi:10.1023/A:1012976702296