OLTD 508 - Mobile learning & Gaming |
Inquiry Project
Click image below |
Course Description:
Students will examine the underlying concepts driving the adoption of mobile and gaming technologies in education. This course will offer opportunities to examine potential devices/apps/games, issues (e.g., supporting infrastructure, management, digital divide), resource selection, integration in curriculum, and potential venues for creating mobile and/or gaming content for educational use. Instructor: Greg Lewis
|
At the beginning of OLTD 508, instructor Greg Lewis posed two overarching "guiding questions". The questions were:
Below are my evidence pieces and reflections, which address these questions.
- How can mobile technologies augment formal knowledge and assist both the student and the teacher with their learning?
- Can well designed and intentioned games offer alternative learning experiences for students that teach and inspire?
Below are my evidence pieces and reflections, which address these questions.
EVIDENCE & REFLECTION OF LEARNING #1
OLTD Program Learning Outcome:
|
|
Evidence to Support Outcome:
The evidence I have selected to demonstrate competency with respect to the above-noted learning outcome is a Piktochart that was created for Part A of Assignment #1: Mobile Technologies. Students were asked to consider some of the enduring issues and challenges that exist, and how educators might be able to leverage the affordances of a mobile device in the classroom to enhance learning and to meet educational goals. Below is an infographic I created to address this question. |
Does BYOD/BYOT Create a "Digital Divide"? |
|
Reflection to Support Evidence: The creation of the Piktochart has allowed me to become familiar with common terms, definitions and elements related to mobile learning and gaming environments. In particular, the infographic represents my thoughts and research on whether BYOD/BYOT policies create a “Digital Divide”. My reflections revolved around the question of how educators can overcome the digital divide to offer all students an equal opportunity to gain 21st Century skills and literacies. This topic has been particularly relevant to my teaching context, as a digital divide, or “an economic and social inequality with regard to access to, use of, or impact of information and communication technologies (ICT)” (Wikipedia, n.d., para. 1), can be seen throughout B.C., and it is particularly noticeable in remote and rural communities such as the area where I live and teach (in northern B.C.). The digital divide is problematic in many B.C. First Nations communities, and consequently, initiatives such as Pathways to Technology have had made great gains at “connecting First Nations to the world” (Pathways to Technology, n.d., n.p.).
It has been said that for those living in impoverished communities, accessing the Internet from a mobile device is the easiest and cheapest way to connect to the Web. Interestingly enough, a Wireless Reach Initiative in North Carolina showed low income students’ test scores increased by 30% with smartphone use (Mashable, n.d.). This data seems to be supported by Pew Research Data (Kridel, 2013) that indicates that smart phone penetration is consistent across youth demographics. Kridel (2013) states, “ BYOD democratizes mobile technologies by making them available to more” (para.1). Thus, it is felt that mobile technologies can minimize hardware-related costs, increase access due to decreased costs, provide opportunities for collaboration and authentic learning, and provide enhanced engagement opportunities for students. As an educator, this evidence piece is a reminder that we need to consider access to technology and the Internet, including reliable bandwidth, when we are planning learning opportunities. More importantly, we need to look at how we can use technologies available to our students to increase engagement opportunities and success. After all, educators can contribute to the perpetuation of the digital divide if they don’t: 1) ensure that current technology is being used, 2) maximize student sharing of existing technology, 3) increase access time, 4) notify students of additional community access areas for technology, and 5) advocate for technology equity. As educators, we need to understand common terms, definitions, elements and aspects of mobile learning, so we can continue to advocate for our students, and ultimately, so we can work towards narrowing or bridging the digital divide. References
Farley, H. et al., (2015). How Do Students Use Their Mobile Devices to Support Learning? A Case Study from an Australian Regional University. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. 2015(1), p. Art. 14. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/jime.ar Kridel, T. (2013, June 5). BYOD in Schools: Bridging or Expanding the Digital Divide? [Blog post]. AVNetwork. Retrieved March 4, 2016, from http://www.avnetwork.com/entry/byodin-schools-bridging-or-expanding-the-digital-divide/757 -sthash.f1aMHJSS.dpuf Mashable (n.d.). Low Income Students' Test Scores Leap 30% With Smartphone Use [Blog post]. Retrieved March 5, 2016, from http://mashable.com/2012/10/15/wireless-reachstudents/#eVQQ8vbyHEqZ Pathways to Technology (n.d.). Retrieved March 10, 2016, from http://www.pathwaystotechnology.ca/ Robinson, J. (2012, July 21). “Digital-Divide” Is Not an Excuse to Avoid Implementing a BYOD Policy at Your School [Blog post]. The 21st Century Principal. Retrieved March 5, 2016, from http://the21stcenturyprincipal.blogspot.ca/2012/07/digital-divide-is-not-excuseto.html Taylor, A. (2011). Social media as a tool for inclusion. Homelessness Resource Center Website. Retrieved from http://homelesshub.ca/sites/default/files/Taylor_Social%20Media_feb2011%20(1)_1_2.pdf Wikipedia (n.d). Digital Divide. Retrieved September 14, 2015, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide |
EVIDENCE & REFLECTION OF LEARNING #2
OLTD Program Learning Outcome:
|
|
Evidence to Support Outcome:
The evidence piece I have selected to demonstrate competency with regard to meeting the OLTD 508 program learning outcome noted above is a game review completed during Weeks 2 and 3, for Part B of Assignment #2: Game Based Learning - Exploration of a serious/educational game. The game I chose to review was the Nova RNA Lab Game, and I created a Gliffy interactive flow chart to present my findings. Note: Prior to completing the Nova Labs game review (Part B of Assignment #2), an investigation of game design was conducted to provide a basis for understanding (this was Part A of Assignment #2: Good Learning via Gaming).
Reflection to Support Evidence:
For Part B of Assignment #2, our task was to select and review a serious/educational game that could fit with our area of teaching or professional expertise (i.e., a game that could be used in our course/class/workplace to enhance our lesson(s) through the contribution of “formal knowledge”). The game I chose to review, as noted above, was the Nova RNA Lab Game. I had not researched or played this game before, and I came across this game through one of the many wonderful links Instructor Greg Lewis provided (it took a great deal of time to decide on a game, as the potential to get lost down the ‘rabbit hole’ of exploration and discovery was too hard to resist at times). I found that because I was new to the Nova RNA Lab game, the process of critically assessing and evaluating the resource (game) for best practice in a mobile learning and gaming environment seemed to progress quite naturally, although it certainly helped to be given some primary areas of focus within the parameters of the assignment. It was interesting to note that although assessing factors such as the game’s platform, cost, hardware requirements, and multiplayer/stand alone requirements seemed straightforward, the appropriate age/grade range for the game seemed less clear. Different reviews identified the game as being appropriate for different ages/grades, and this age/grade fit appeared to likely be determined by the learners’ abilities, and by the grade’s curriculum requirements. Thus, my recommendation for age appropriateness was not as broad as other recommendations. Regarding the elements of ‘gaming’, James Paul Gee’s “Principles of Gaming” were used as a criterion of reference while I worked my way through the Nova RNA Lab, with the goal of assessing the game to see if it could create ‘good’ effective learning. Elements of game play and user experience were evaluated, as were two of Gee’s principles that I consider to be important in the design of a game – the Customization Principle and the Identity Principle. Both of the aforementioned principles fall under the category of empowered learners, meaning learners need to choose to learn, and they need to feel what they do will matter or be good for them. Regarding the Nova RNA Game Lab, I determined that both the Customization Principle and the Identity Principle were met, although at times in limited capacities (for example, one needs to sequentially complete the puzzle levels before being able to join the Eterna Community for the opportunity to make a difference by contributing to the world of scientific investigation). It should be noted that due to the main purpose of the game being to learn about RNA, information on the roles and relevance of RNA, etc., was abundant (game play was visually appealing and colourful, although information and hints were predominantly text based – use of more audio would have enhanced the game, in my opinion), and reference to and availability of further resources to supplement the game’s puzzles was impressive. Further details on elements of the game can be found on the Gliffy, including an audio summary of my overall impressions. The creation of the Gliffy flowchart allowed for a graphic representation and an overview of the ‘levels’ of the game, which consisted of a basic introduction level and three further lab trials, each with six puzzles (for which a badge of sorts was awarded upon completion). This activity, therefore, allowed me to engage in learning through the eyes of a student. I now realize how important it is to test out the games we choose to use in our teaching practice (not just once, but a few times – my impressions differed the first and second time I played the game, as my user experience was different). Furthermore, after studying Gee’s principles of game design, I realize how important game design is, and how much the elements of a game can contribute towards or hinder engagement and learning. The thoughtful and analytical choice of games that educators use to support their teaching will ultimately ensure greater success in meeting the lesson’s desired learning outcomes. After all, humans create games, and all of the game designers’ biases and cultural or societal beliefs can subtly be embedded within the code of the game. References:
Gee, J. P. (2013, November 13). “Jim Gee Principles on Gaming” [Video]. Retrieved March 14, 2016, from https://youtu.be/4aQAgAjTozk GMU (n.d.). Learning Principles. Retrieved March 19, 2016, from http://mason.gmu.edu/~lsmithg/jamespaulgee2print.html Drawn from Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about literacy and learning. New York: Palgraw Macmillan. |