Educational Games' How To

... if you look at them the right way. If nothing else, you can either learn how to improve at a game or you can learn that you cannot improve at a game (a perfectly skilled opponent or a completely random game). Since a lot of games are abstractions of real life (to some extent), lessons learned in one apply to the other; the important thing to pay attention to is exactly what each game can teach. Many classic board games are perfect examples of chance/random behaviour (Chutes and Ladders), logic (Cluedo), or strategy/risk management (Checkers, Chess, etc). Card games, too (Poker is a classic example of both psychology and probability theory). When you step into the realm of having "games" teach principles normally covered in mandatory formal education (Maths, Economics, History, Geography), however, a lot of educators seem to forget that lessons don't have to come from a textbook in order to provide accurate information and stimulate critical thinking. I'm not sure why, but I'd wager it has to do with liability concerns, and that only certain works are "proven" to provide the material intended to be taught. As if the most important part of school was memorization.

I have not yet attempted to deal directly with the establishment and their misconceptions, and I expect I never will. My opinion on this is to show the people (parents and children alike) what the schools are lacking and let them argue for you. They're the ones who really have something to lose, after all. Their futures are at stake, if they can but see it; the most I have to lose is not selling a game.

I am working on designing a game based around the fundamental concepts of economics. I may never use the terms of Supply and Demand, Specialization, Efficiency, and Opportunity Cost, but as long as the mechanics are in place, I believe that the game can be used as an effective teaching tool for economics. However, my intended goal for this game is not to teach economics at all, but to show the benefits of teamwork and the setbacks when teamwork doesn't occur. I chose economics merely because it is an arena that shows the benefits of teamwork clearly and in a quantifiable way.

I cannot really comment on the "constraints of teaching requirements" because I do not know what you mean by that. It may be obvious to official educators, but I am not one. I have merely become frustrated with the current state of formal education methods. My family is hosting an exchange student that is attending a local high school, and this is actually my first real experience with public schooling (I was homeschooled until I went off to a private college). The textbooks are horrid, and it's no wonder that the kids are doing poorly if this is an accurate example of the norm. Students are learning that the material is obtuse, awkward, and useless. This is patently not so, but the delivery of the material is exactly so. If I can show that the same kind of lessons are present in the games and activities that our exchange student already enjoys, I might be able to prevent an undeserved lifelong distaste for learning. Children really only have two reasons to learn, for their pleasure or for their parents', and for their own pleasure is the stronger reason. Children (all people, really) are naturally learners; we do it instinctively when the subject matter is either interesting or necessary, and since children do not have the life experience to recognize what is truly necessary, we must resort to making it interesting.

As attributed to Mark Twain, "Never let your schooling interfere with your education." For many adults, formal schooling is not critical if you have learned how to learn from life. You will be able to educate yourself should you find a suitable reason to do so. Personally, I think games are a wonderful teaching tool due to the fact that the largest barrier to education (assuming that schooling is available) is a lack of interest/motivation on the part of the student, and games, by design, circumvent that. By studying how people improve at a game as they play it, students can recognize that the same self-education happens in real life. By focusing on the abstract nature of games and their relation to real life counterparts, we can help students recognize how the same strategies and critical thinking used to win at games can help people succeed in life, and isn't helping people succeed in life what school is really all about?

P.S. I apologize for rambling, but I've learned a good bit about my own feelings through writing this, and I hope you can see what I was trying to say even if I've failed to be clear.

As a high school math teacher I always seem to be jotting ideas down for a game to use in my classroom. I got frustrated in not being able to find a game that did what I wanted it to do so I made my own through The Game Crafter. It is called Solve and Settle and it has an entry over at BoardGameGeek.

In regards to working around the constraints of teaching...I use the game as a review during class do it doesn't "waste" any instructional time but rather is played on review days. It is a game that is specific to Algebra I and only a certain topic in Algebra I, so I don't use it often. I am working on a dice game for my Trigonometry classes right now. I hope to finish it this summer.

Instead of getting around the educational establishment...I took the game to an educational conference and was a presenter at a break-out session. It was pretty well received and not just by math teachers. I wasn't trying to sell my game...but rather to show other teachers how they can use The Game Crafter to create their own games for classroom use.

It's hard to find a mainstream game where solving trigonometric equations is involved...so I just create my own and use The Game Crafter to produce it. Knowing that I am not going to make millions on my games doesn't bother me but I make them available at TGC if people want them.

"[How] many of us out there are working on games for teaching?"

I have always used games for teaching, and I've found them useful for every subject (I've never taught physical education, though).

"[How] do you work within the constraints of teaching requirements to deliver a fun product?"

I ask myself, "What is the learning objective here?" and "How can I design the activity to respond to this need?" Games are inherently fun (or should be) for my students because they do not resemble traditional "book learning" activities.

"[How] do you deal with the educational establishment's general misunderstanding regarding what constitutes a game and how how (sic) games can promote learning?"

(1) Everything is a game because everything is learning. I like to take a mundane activity from their daily lives (e.g. grocery shopping; commuting) and demonstrate how it is actually a "game" that results in "learning".

(2) I flood their email inboxes with internet links to educational research and reports on the role of play (and games) in learning. When they question my methods, I cite the information I've already sent to them, and ask them to challenge the validity of my approach with research they have conducted or discovered.

Play on.

Sry, no time to read right now but the title made me think of this video
http://www.ted.com/talks/brenda_brathwaite_gaming_for_understanding.html

Sometimes teachers run into the problem that administration assumes games must be electronic, even though the typical electronic game can isolate, and is more suitable for rote learning than for education. (There's also the problem of unavailability of computers.) Young people want interaction with others, which tabletop games provides.

Administrations (and teachers) often question whether students actually learn anything by playing games, often resorting to "is it confirmed by a paper assessment". As paper assessments tend to be multiple choice, hence far removed from reality ("life is an essay test"), they often don't really show whether people have learned, so a person who wants to use games is faced with a criterion that isn't valid. Rather those assessments show what people have memorized, not what they can DO. This varies greatly from subject to subject, of course.

Hi Jim,
I work with an education resources company, though I wouldn't be able to help with a connection. It looks like your company has done good legwork on research and effectiveness. Right now the big trend is in common core, if you research math common core, and document which common core requirements your game emphasizes. The areas in Operations and Algebraic thinking have language that melds well to games. You can see the standards at commoncore.org.

Another observation I've made is that resources should tie to training for their best reception. If your can offer a half hour video or so of using the game to satisfy common core requirements, getting kids engaged, etc. you are likely better positioned. Maybe throw in a certificate.

I had found a site on an education tech board game course that ended up leading me here and to The Game Crafter...
http://edweb.sdsu.edu/courses/edtec670/

Your products look interesting, but much of the sales information seems oriented toward the individual rather than towards the school. If a school or even a classroom teacher is interested, questions like: how many copies and what cost per do I need to get my whole class involved? Or how many students are covered by that subscription? Come to mind.